← Dataset search
Provenance — who produced it, who reused it
Linked to 3 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
3 further papers cite this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.
Deep data QC
insufficient data to scoreStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained
Data type / assay
methylation
Organism
Zea mays
Instrument
HiSeq X Ten
Platform
ILLUMINA
Read type
short-read
Files available
FASTQ (raw reads)
N numbers (samples, groups)
44 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok
yes
reported
total bases
167069749548
reported
total reads
1126524641
reported
n content pct
0
measured
pct q20 bases
99.5
measured
pct q30 bases
97.5
measured
gc content pct
53
measured
mean read length
22.5
measured
mean base quality
37.2
measured
adapter content pct
0
measured
duplication rate pct
54.71
measured
How this grade was computed
The insufficient grade is a transparent weighted average. Each metric below scored from 0–100% against the published methylation thresholds, weighted by its importance; nothing is hidden or subjective.
pct q30 bases
97.5
measured
×1
100%
QC cost
17 s compute
measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0