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
100/100 · AStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
This HiSeq 4000 RNA-seq from the brown planthopper Nilaparvata lugens generated 28.3M reads spanning 8.4B bases with 96.3% Q20 and 91.2% Q30, providing substantial transcriptome depth for studying insect-plant interactions and pest-resistance mechanisms. The 46.5% GC is expected. Reuse is ideal for identifying host-recognition and detoxification genes; caveat that diet and pesticide exposure strongly modulate transcriptional responses.
The A 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