← Dataset search
Provenance — who produced it, who reused it
Linked to 2 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
2 further papers cite this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.
Deep data QC
92/100 · AStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Data type / assay
WGS
Organism
Bacteroides fragilis
Instrument
Illumina MiSeq
Platform
ILLUMINA
Read type
hybrid (short+long)
Files available
FASTQ (raw reads)
N numbers (samples, groups)
5 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok
yes
reported
total bases
2065619030
reported
total reads
2272840
reported
n content pct
0.031
measured
pct q20 bases
95.6
measured
pct q30 bases
94.5
measured
gc content pct
43
measured
mean read length
133.9
measured
mean base quality
36.5
measured
adapter content pct
0
measured
duplication rate pct
17.82
measured
How this grade was computed
Weighted mean of 3 scored metric(s) → 92/100
The A 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.
pct q30 bases
94.5
measured
×1
100%
duplication rate pct
17.82
measured
×0.5
69%
adapter content pct
0
measured
×0.4
100%
QC cost
11 s compute
measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0