← Dataset search
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
insufficient data to scoreStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained
Data type / assay
methylation
Organism
Callorhinchus milii
Instrument
Illumina HiSeq 2000
Platform
ILLUMINA
Read type
short-read
Files available
FASTQ (raw reads)
N numbers (samples, groups)
12 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok
yes
reported
total bases
10144670691
reported
total reads
100928400
reported
n content pct
0
measured
pct q20 bases
75.8
measured
pct q30 bases
67
measured
gc content pct
36.8
measured
mean read length
250
measured
mean base quality
30.8
measured
adapter content pct
63.34
measured
duplication rate pct
0.38
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
67
measured
×1
0%
QC cost
5 s compute
measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0