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
Mouse targeted amplicon with inadequate base quality. Failed QC (47/100, F) with Q30 of 74.1%, well below the standard for accurate variant calling in amplicons, combined with high duplication (89.8%); both metrics indicate poor performance for mutation detection. Not recommended for reuse without evidence of raw data quality improvement.
The F 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