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
17/100 · FStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
This Illumina HiSeq 2000 bulk RNA-seq dataset from Mucispirillum schaedleri ASF457 (murine intestinal commensal) comprises 225 million reads and 22.5 billion bases; however, the anomalous 0% Q20 and Q30 bases indicate a data quality issue requiring verification. The 48% GC fits typical bacterial genomes; if quality is confirmed, the large read count supports comprehensive transcriptome profiling of this colonist's nutrient-acquisition and host-interaction gene expression. Researchers must independently validate raw quality distributions before downstream analysis.
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