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
17/100 · FStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
This Genome Analyzer IIx RNA-seq from Bombyx mori produced 18.7M reads across 654M bases with moderate Q-scores (88.5% Q20, 61.1% Q30) and elevated N-content (0.09%), indicating degraded data quality from this early sequencer. The 49% GC is normal. Reuse is limited to presence/absence surveys; caveat that poor base quality and platform age severely compromise quantitative expression analysis and isoform-level work.
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.
measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0