← Dataset search
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.
Reused by
1 further paper cites this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.
Deep data QC
insufficient data to scoreStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained
Data type / assay
methylation
Organism
Homo sapiens
Instrument
454 GS Junior
Platform
LS454
Files available
FASTQ (raw reads)
N numbers (samples, groups)
84 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok
yes
reported
total bases
21498450
reported
total reads
133572
reported
n content pct
0.144
measured
pct q20 bases
0
measured
pct q30 bases
0
measured
gc content pct
46.7
measured
mean read length
201.4
measured
mean base quality
9
measured
adapter content pct
0
measured
duplication rate pct
79.97
measured
How this grade was computed
The insufficient grade is a transparent weighted average. Each metric below scored from 0–100% against the published methylation thresholds, weighted by its importance; nothing is hidden or subjective.
pct q30 bases
0
measured
×1
0%
QC cost
1 s compute
measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0