← Dataset search
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.
Reused by
1 further paper cites this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.
Deep data QC
insufficient data to scoreStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained
Data type / assay
ChIP-seq
Organism
Drosophila melanogaster
Instrument
Illumina HiSeq 2000
Platform
ILLUMINA
Read type
short-read
Files available
FASTQ (raw reads)
N numbers (samples, groups)
13 / 13 runs
Completeness
100%
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok
yes
reported
total bases
77380398082
reported
total reads
421572002
reported
n content pct
0.076
measured
pct q20 bases
97.2
measured
pct q30 bases
96.5
measured
gc content pct
40.6
measured
mean read length
36.6
measured
mean base quality
36.2
measured
adapter content pct
0
measured
duplication rate pct
16.8
measured
supplementary file types
BED, BEDGRAPH
reported
How this grade was computed
The insufficient grade is a transparent weighted average. Each metric below scored from 0–100% against the published ChIP-seq thresholds, weighted by its importance; nothing is hidden or subjective.
pct q30 bases
96.5
measured
×1
100%
QC cost
14 s compute
measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0