PRJNA287560
BioProjectProvenance — 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
88/100 · BStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
WGS (Escherichia coli, Illumina GA IIx). B grade, but evidence_strength is low (0.61). Base quality (Q30=82.9%) is adequate for variant calling, and reported coverage is extremely high (53,365.8×), but coverage is extrapolated—mapping-based depth must be independently validated before variant interpretation.
The B 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
Scientific quality
Based on hands-on reproduction of the papers that use this dataset. A reproducible paper that stands on this data is positive evidence; a flagged one is a prompt to look closer — never a verdict on the dataset itself without the evidence.