← Dataset search
Provenance — who produced it, who reused it
Linked to 4 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
4 further papers cite this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.
Deep data QC
100/100 · AStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Data type / assay
WGS
Organism
Abiotrophia defectiva ATCC 49176
Instrument
454 GS
Platform
CAPILLARY
Read type
hybrid (short+long)
Files available
FASTQ (raw reads)
N numbers (samples, groups)
6,281 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok
yes
reported
total bases
2690695796931
reported
total reads
13171485860
reported
n content pct
0.01
measured
pct q20 bases
100
measured
pct q30 bases
100
measured
gc content pct
42.1
measured
mean read length
249.5
measured
mean base quality
30
measured
adapter content pct
0
measured
duplication rate pct
5.27
measured
How this grade was computed
Weighted mean of 3 scored metric(s) → 100/100
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
100
measured
×1
100%
duplication rate pct
5.27
measured
×0.5
100%
adapter content pct
0
measured
×0.4
100%
QC cost
1 s compute
measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0