Corpus 1,272 assessed · 1,173 scored · 643 reproduced ≥75 · 168 flagged ·∅ 74.1/100
← Dataset search

PRJNA204941

BioProject first seen 2015

Provenance — who produced it, who reused it

Linked to 7 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

7 further papers cite this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.

Deep data QC

100/100 · A

Standardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured

What this means
claude:haiku

High-quality bulk RNA-seq of Gallus gallus. Grade A, 100/100 with all metrics measured. Excellent across all dimensions—Q30 bases (92.8%), controlled duplication (17.2%), minimal adapters—indicating ideal sequencing chemistry and library construction. Gold-standard dataset suitable for robust expression quantification and differential expression analysis.

Data type / assay
bulk-RNA-seq
Organism
Gallus gallus gallus
Instrument
Illumina HiSeq 2000
Platform
ILLUMINA
N numbers (samples, groups)
54 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok yes reported
total bases 426264297400 reported
total reads 2859995342 reported
n content pct 0.003 measured
pct q20 bases 97.2 measured
pct q30 bases 92.8 measured
gc content pct 48.7 measured
mean read length 100 measured
mean base quality 36 measured
adapter content pct 0.4 measured
duplication rate pct 17.19 measured
How this grade was computed
Weighted mean of 4 scored metric(s) → 100/100

The A 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.

pct q30 bases 92.8 measured ×1 100%
mean base quality 36 measured ×0.6 100%
adapter content pct 0.4 measured ×0.4 100%
duplication rate pct 17.19 measured ×0.4 100%

measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0

Scientific quality

Based on hands-on reproduction of the papers that use this dataset. A reproducible paper that stands on this data is positive evidence; a flagged one is a prompt to look closer — never a verdict on the dataset itself without the evidence.

2 studies use it 2 reproduced mean score 90