Provenance — who produced it, who reused it
Linked to 2 papers in the literature. Roles are inferred factual signals (who deposited the data vs who reused it), with counts — never a judgement about any author.
- Distinct longevity mechanisms across and within species and thei... 2023 · 149 cites
1 further paper cites this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.
Deep data QC
93/100 · AStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Naked mole rat (Heterocephalus glaber) bulk-RNA-seq with 90 bp reads at 94.4% Q20 and 89% Q30 across 890 million bases enables comparative transcriptomics. The 47.8% GC and mean quality 34.2 support expression analysis in this unusual eusocial rodent; suitable for studying aging, cancer resistance, and social behavior at the molecular level.
The A grade is a transparent weighted average. Each metric below scored from 0–100% against the published bulk-RNA-seq thresholds, weighted by its importance; nothing is hidden or subjective.
measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0
Scientific quality
Based on hands-on reproduction of the papers that use this dataset. A reproducible paper that stands on this data is positive evidence; a flagged one is a prompt to look closer — never a verdict on the dataset itself without the evidence.