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.
1 further paper cites this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.
Deep data QC
47/100 · FStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Whole-genome sequencing of Fusarium oxysporum via NextSeq 500 with hybrid (short + long) reads, generating 42 million reads (13.5 billion bases) with notably lower quality (72.2% Q20, 60.7% Q30), particularly for long-read chemistry. Enables fungal plant pathogen genome assembly and effector identification; the 44.9% GC reflects plant pathogenic ascomycete genome composition. The reduced base quality, especially in the long-read fraction, may necessitate stringent QC and repeat-aware assembly algorithms; hybrid reads support scaffolding across repetitive effector regions and pathogenic region characterization.
The F 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