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
71/100 · CStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
This Danaus plexippus (monarch butterfly) bulk RNA-seq on a NextSeq 500 comprises 19.1 million short reads (2.9 billion bases) with notably lower quality metrics (87.5% Q20, 82.9% Q30) than typical RNA-seq standards. The elevated GC content (48.4%) may indicate biased amplification or tissue-specific composition. Usable for initial expression screening, but the lower Q30 requires aggressive trimming; verify sample integrity before committing to quantitative cross-sample comparisons.
The C 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