SRR060667

SRA first seen 2021

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

17/100 · 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 from Drosophila virilis with inadequate base quality (62.9% Q30 bases) and severe duplication (76.1%) from older Genome Analyzer technology, yielding unreliable transcript abundance estimates; not recommended for reuse in modern analyses.

Data type / assay

bulk-RNA-seq

Organism

Drosophila virilis

Instrument

Illumina Genome Analyzer

Platform

ILLUMINA

Read type

short-read

Files available

FASTQ (raw reads)

N numbers (samples, groups)

1 runs

Metrics (value · how obtained)

checksum ok yes reported

total bases 215815896 reported

total reads 5994886 reported

n content pct 0.005 measured

pct q20 bases 87.7 measured

pct q30 bases 62.9 measured

gc content pct 49.1 measured

mean read length 36 measured

mean base quality 28.1 measured

adapter content pct 0 measured

duplication rate pct 76.11 measured

How this grade was computed

Weighted mean of 4 scored metric(s) → 17/100

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 62.9 measured ×1 0%

mean base quality 28.1 measured ×0.6 2%

adapter content pct 0 measured ×0.4 100%

duplication rate pct 76.11 measured ×0.4 0%

QC cost 28 s compute

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