← 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
Drosophila melanogaster
Instrument
AB SOLiD 4 System
Platform
ABI_SOLID
Read type
short-read
Files available
FASTQ (raw reads), BAM/CRAM (aligned)
N numbers (samples, groups)
8 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok
yes
reported
total bases
17360961552
reported
total reads
357469788
reported
n content pct
0
measured
pct q20 bases
86.5
measured
pct q30 bases
76.4
measured
gc content pct
45
measured
mean read length
48
measured
mean base quality
41.6
measured
adapter content pct
0
measured
duplication rate pct
35.66
measured
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
76.4
measured
×1
32%
QC cost
28 s compute
measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0