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
47/100 · FStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
This AB SOLiD 4 System whole-genome sequencing dataset from Saccharomyces pastorianus comprises 192 million reads and 9.6 billion bases but shows degraded quality (53.7% Q20, 25.4% Q30) characteristic of this obsolete platform. The anomalous 0% GC content is a major data-quality red flag suggesting processing errors or calibration failure. Despite platform age, researchers should obtain raw sequence files and verify independently; if correctable, the dataset may retain utility for strain identification, though modern resequencing is recommended for genomics applications.
The F grade is a transparent weighted average. Each metric below scored from 0–100% against the published WGS 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