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

PRJNA813221

BioProject

Provenance — who produced it, who reused it

Linked to 0 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.

No linked papers found in the corpus yet.

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

Ultra-deep human bulk-RNA-seq on NovaSeq 6000 with 150 bp reads accumulated 1.07 billion reads (320 Gb) at 97.8% Q20 and 93.8% Q30, enabling detection of rare and lowly-expressed transcripts. The 51% GC and ~1M base depth per gene provides sensitivity for studying isoform switching and cryptic splicing in diverse developmental or disease contexts.

Data type / assay
bulk-RNA-seq
Organism
Homo sapiens
Instrument
Illumina NovaSeq 6000
Platform
ILLUMINA
N numbers (samples, groups)
39 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok yes reported
total bases 320039303400 reported
total reads 1066797678 reported
n content pct 0.002 measured
pct q20 bases 97.8 measured
pct q30 bases 93.8 measured
gc content pct 51 measured
mean read length 150 measured
mean base quality 36 measured
adapter content pct 1.67 measured
duplication rate pct 27.23 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 93.8 measured ×1 100%
mean base quality 36 measured ×0.6 100%
adapter content pct 1.67 measured ×0.4 100%
duplication rate pct 27.23 measured ×0.4 100%
QC cost 8 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 53