Corpus 1,273 assessed · 1,174 scored · 643 reproduced ≥75 · 169 flagged ·∅ 74.1/100
← Dataset search

PRJNA301162

BioProject

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.

Reused by

1 further paper cites this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.

Deep data QC

100/100 · A

Standardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured

What this means
claude:haiku

Bulk RNA-seq (75bp, HiSeq 2500, Arabidopsis thaliana). Grade A (100/100): reference-quality across all dimensions. Mean base quality 38.5 (exceptional for HiSeq), Q30 97.7%, and well-controlled duplication (20.12%) make this exemplary for any application requiring high confidence.

Data type / assay
bulk-RNA-seq
Organism
Arabidopsis thaliana
Instrument
Illumina HiSeq 2500
Platform
ILLUMINA
N numbers (samples, groups)
41 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok yes reported
total bases 185406184425 reported
total reads 1269609241 reported
n content pct 0.001 measured
pct q20 bases 99.3 measured
pct q30 bases 97.7 measured
gc content pct 44.7 measured
mean read length 75 measured
mean base quality 38.5 measured
adapter content pct 0.03 measured
duplication rate pct 20.12 measured
How this grade was computed
Weighted mean of 4 scored metric(s) → 100/100

The A grade is a transparent weighted average. Each metric below scored from 0–100% against the published bulk-RNA-seq thresholds, weighted by its importance; nothing is hidden or subjective.

pct q30 bases 97.7 measured ×1 100%
mean base quality 38.5 measured ×0.6 100%
adapter content pct 0.03 measured ×0.4 100%
duplication rate pct 20.12 measured ×0.4 100%
QC cost 11 s compute

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.

1 studies use it mean score 59