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
42/100 · FStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Aedes aegypti bulk RNA-seq with failing quality (F grade). The combination of Q30 at 74.8% (below the ~85% threshold for robust expression quantitation) and extreme duplication at 57.98% are the critical failures—these directly undermine SNP/indel confidence and inflate expression estimates through PCR artifacts. Not recommended for reuse without aggressive trimming and experimental validation.
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