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
41/100 · FStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Eukaryotic bulk RNA-seq fails QC (41/100, F-grade) due to multiple severe issues. Q30 bases at only 72.3% (12/100 score, weight 1) and mean base quality of 30 (33/100 score) represent critical accuracy deficits—transcript sequences cannot be reliably distinguished from sequencing error. Combined with elevated duplication (44.08%), this dataset is unsuitable for any quantification or assembly application without re-sequencing. Do not reuse.
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