SRP049944

ENA first seen 2017

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.

Reused by

1 further paper cites this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.

Deep data QC

41/100 · F

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

What this means

claude:haiku

Bulk RNA-seq unsuitable for reuse due to multiple compounding failures; high duplication (66.4%), significant adapter contamination (13.29%), marginal Q30 (78.7%), and low mean quality (31.2) collectively compromise expression quantification reliability.

Data type / assay

bulk-RNA-seq

Organism

Homo sapiens

Instrument

Illumina HiSeq 2000

Platform

ILLUMINA

Read type

short-read

Files available

FASTQ (raw reads)

N numbers (samples, groups)

334 runs

Metrics (value · how obtained)

checksum ok yes reported

total bases 570599583858 reported

total reads 2916298377 reported

n content pct 0.116 measured

pct q20 bases 84.9 measured

pct q30 bases 78.7 measured

gc content pct 40.2 measured

mean read length 101 measured

mean base quality 31.2 measured

adapter content pct 13.29 measured

duplication rate pct 66.4 measured

How this grade was computed

Weighted mean of 4 scored metric(s) → 41/100

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.

pct q30 bases 78.7 measured ×1 44%

mean base quality 31.2 measured ×0.6 53%

adapter content pct 13.29 measured ×0.4 37%

duplication rate pct 66.4 measured ×0.4 19%

QC cost 40 s compute

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