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
47/100 · FStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Hybrid short and long-read whole-genome sequencing of Klebsiella pneumoniae via MiSeq with ~4.7M reads, but notably showing zero Q20 and Q30 bases for a subset of reads, suggesting potential quality control issues. This dataset combines different read lengths for genome assembly but requires careful investigation of the zero-quality reads before reuse. The zero-quality metrics likely indicate polishing or supplementary long-read data, warranting verification with sequence repository metadata.
The F 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.
measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0