PRJNA540940

BioProject first seen 2019

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

61/100 · D

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

What this means

claude:haiku

Short-read WGS with moderate-quality issues grading D. Duplication at 53.6% (weight-0.5 metric, scored 0/100) and Q30 at 85.1% (weight-1 metric, scored 76/100) indicate PCR bias and borderline base quality. Usable with duplicate removal and conservative variant filtering, but marginal for high-confidence discovery.

Data type / assay

WGS

Organism

Anindobothrium anacolum

Instrument

Illumina MiSeq

Platform

ILLUMINA

Read type

short-read

Files available

FASTQ (raw reads)

N numbers (samples, groups)

8 runs

Metrics (value · how obtained)

checksum ok yes reported

total bases 88855994 reported

total reads 196815 reported

n content pct 0 measured

pct q20 bases 90.1 measured

pct q30 bases 85.1 measured

gc content pct 31.7 measured

mean read length 122.3 measured

mean base quality 32.6 measured

adapter content pct 0 measured

duplication rate pct 53.6 measured

How this grade was computed

Weighted mean of 3 scored metric(s) → 61/100

The D 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.

pct q30 bases 85.1 measured ×1 76%

duplication rate pct 53.6 measured ×0.5 0%

adapter content pct 0 measured ×0.4 100%

QC cost 1 s compute

measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0