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
67/100 · DStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Short-read amplicon of zebrafish scoring D-grade (67/100) with 20.12% adapter content (measured) as the primary bottleneck—one-in-five reads affected, reducing effective yield. High duplication (88.58%) is amplicon-expected; the adapter contamination, not duplication, drives reuse constraints. Mean target coverage is extrapolated; a deep measured pass is pending.
The D grade is a transparent weighted average. Each metric below scored from 0–100% against the published amplicon 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