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
82/100 · BStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Mouse bulk RNA sequencing with good reads but elevated duplication. Moderate QC (82/100, B) with Q30 of 87.9% and strong base quality (34.8%), but duplication at 65.46% indicates substantial PCR over-amplification, which will inflate relative abundance of repeated sequences and skew fold-change estimates. Usable for expression work with awareness that low-abundance transcripts may be underrepresented.
The B 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