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
67/100 · DStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
This HiSeq 2000 RNA-seq from Aedes aegypti generated 16.5M reads spanning 842M bases with 99.6% Q20 and 98.7% Q30, delivering pristine data quality suitable for sensitive isoform and rare-transcript detection. The 49.5% GC is within normal range. Reuse is excellent for high-confidence expression studies; caveat that moderate overall depth limits power for detecting subtle expression differences in lowly-abundant genes.
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.
measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0