SRP187461

ENA first seen 2019

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

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

Mus musculus

Instrument

NextSeq 500

Platform

ILLUMINA

Read type

short-read

Files available

FASTQ (raw reads)

N numbers (samples, groups)

348 runs

Metrics (value · how obtained)

checksum ok yes reported

total bases 182918720296 reported

total reads 2424519275 reported

n content pct 0.004 measured

pct q20 bases 95.3 measured

pct q30 bases 93.3 measured

gc content pct 43.4 measured

mean read length 75.5 measured

mean base quality 34.2 measured

adapter content pct 0.01 measured

duplication rate pct 5.23 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 93.3 measured ×1 100%

QC cost 30 s compute

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