SRP035524

ENA first seen 2014

Provenance — who produced it, who reused it

Linked to 3 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

3 further papers cite this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.

Deep data QC

insufficient data to score

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

Data type / assay

ChIP-seq

Organism

Homo sapiens

Instrument

Illumina HiSeq 1500

Platform

ILLUMINA

Read type

short-read

Files available

FASTQ (raw reads)

N numbers (samples, groups)

72 runs

Metrics (value · how obtained)

checksum ok yes reported

total bases 170127161194 reported

total reads 1545441213 reported

n content pct 0 measured

pct q20 bases 99.1 measured

pct q30 bases 95.6 measured

gc content pct 45 measured

mean read length 90 measured

mean base quality 37.1 measured

adapter content pct 0 measured

duplication rate pct 47.78 measured

How this grade was computed

The insufficient grade is a transparent weighted average. Each metric below scored from 0–100% against the published ChIP-seq thresholds, weighted by its importance; nothing is hidden or subjective.

pct q30 bases 95.6 measured ×1 100%

QC cost 7 s compute

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