Corpus 1,272 assessed · 1,173 scored · 643 reproduced ≥75 · 168 flagged ·∅ 74.1/100
← Dataset search

PRJNA942350

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

Chicken (Gallus gallus) WGS using DNBSEQ-T7 platform generated 16.3 billion reads with extraordinary 4125.3x mean coverage and 97.5% Q20, 92.8% Q30 metrics. The 41.7% GC aligns with avian genomes; ultra-deep sequencing enables variant discovery, structural variant characterization, and population genetics in poultry breeding.

Data type / assay
WGS
Organism
Gallus gallus
Instrument
DNBSEQ-T7
Platform
DNBSEQ
N numbers (samples, groups)
209 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok yes reported
total bases 4537815561150.001 reported
total reads 16334108764 reported
mean coverage 4125.3 extrapolated
n content pct 0.002 measured
pct q20 bases 97.5 measured
pct q30 bases 92.8 measured
gc content pct 41.7 measured
mean read length 150 measured
mean base quality 36 measured
adapter content pct 0.01 measured
duplication rate pct 0.12 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 WGS thresholds, weighted by its importance; nothing is hidden or subjective.

mean coverage 4125.3 extrapolated ×1.2 100%
pct q30 bases 92.8 measured ×1 100%
duplication rate pct 0.12 measured ×0.5 100%
adapter content pct 0.01 measured ×0.4 100%
QC cost 12 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 1 flagged mean score 71