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
33/100 · FStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Danio rerio bulk RNA-seq via AB SOLiD System 3.0 yields 211M reads with poor quality (48.7% ≥Q20, only 3.6% ≥Q30), reflecting the challenging base-calling of color-space sequencing. Substantial quality caveats limit SNP and isoform detection; best suited for abundant-transcript abundance profiling where read depth compensates for accuracy limitations.
The F 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.
measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0