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
59/100 · FStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Bulk RNA-seq of fungus scoring F-grade (59/100) due to dual deficiencies: Q30 at 78.9% (measured) and 10.79% adapter content (measured). Both metrics point to library or sequencing stress; while Q30 borders acceptable for RNA-seq, one-in-ten reads carrying adapters is significant contamination requiring aggressive trimming before expression quantification.
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