← Dataset search
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.
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
Homo sapiens; Mus musculus; Macaca mulatta
Instrument
NextSeq 500
Platform
ILLUMINA
Read type
short-read
Files available
FASTQ (raw reads)
N numbers (samples, groups)
72 / 72 runs
Completeness
100%
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok
yes
reported
total bases
307199637971
reported
total reads
2646707699
reported
n content pct
0
measured
pct q20 bases
93.3
measured
pct q30 bases
88.5
measured
gc content pct
49.3
measured
mean read length
79
measured
mean base quality
33.4
measured
adapter content pct
0
measured
duplication rate pct
5.49
measured
supplementary file types
BW, NARROWPEAK, TXT
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
88.5
measured
×1
93%
QC cost
19 s compute
measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0