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

SRP119014

SRA

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

66/100 · D

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 (Locusta migratoria, large-scale project) with D-grade score (66/100). Below-standard base quality (Q30 80.1%, scoring 50/100; mean 32) and moderate duplication (42.47%, scoring 72/100) across 953M reads suggest systematic run-level drift or contamination. Usable only with stringent transcript-level filtering and normalization.

Data type / assay
bulk-RNA-seq
Organism
Locusta migratoria
Instrument
Illumina HiSeq 2000
Platform
ILLUMINA
N numbers (samples, groups)
24 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok yes reported
total bases 171579586680 reported
total reads 953219926 reported
n content pct 0.002 measured
pct q20 bases 87.7 measured
pct q30 bases 80.1 measured
gc content pct 49.5 measured
mean read length 90 measured
mean base quality 32 measured
adapter content pct 0.04 measured
duplication rate pct 42.47 measured
How this grade was computed
Weighted mean of 4 scored metric(s) → 66/100

The D 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 80.1 measured ×1 51%
mean base quality 32 measured ×0.6 67%
adapter content pct 0.04 measured ×0.4 100%
duplication rate pct 42.47 measured ×0.4 72%
QC cost 11 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 60