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
72/100 · CStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Short-read WGS of activated sludge metagenome. Grade C; acceptable but limited by exceptionally high duplication rate (55.04%), which is typical for metagenomics but problematic for de novo assembly and variant calling. Q30 bases (89.3%) are borderline adequate. Duplication dominates the score; reuse depends on tolerance for duplicate handling in assembly or mapping pipelines.
The C grade is a transparent weighted average. Each metric below scored from 0–100% against the published WGS 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