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
72/100 · CStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Bacterial WGS of Lactobacillus psittaci achieves marginal C-grade QC (72/100) with significant base quality concerns. Q30 fraction of 79.5% (48/100 score, weight 1) falls below confidence thresholds for variant calling—expect elevated false-positive SNP and indel rates at low allele frequencies. Marginal reuse only for coverage-insensitive applications (e.g., rough phylogenomics); not recommended for high-confidence genomic inference.
The C 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