Provenance — who produced it, who reused it
Linked to 1 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.
1 further paper cites this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.
Deep data QC
37/100 · FStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Sinorhizobium meliloti bulk RNA-seq with identical quality profile to GSM1078108 (86.2% Q20, 79.2% Q30, 5.96% adapters), including 60% GC consistent with this symbiotic bacterium's genomic composition. This replicate or technical repeat offers confirmation of expression patterns in rhizobial-legume interactions. Evaluate both samples together to distinguish biological signal from sequencing artifacts, given the borderline quality metrics.
The F 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