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
97/100 · AStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Mosquito (Culex quinquefasciatus) bulk RNA-seq; excellent quality and recommended for reuse (grade A). Exceptionally clean profile with minimal adapter contamination (0.2%) and high base quality (Q30: 93.2%, mean Q: 35.6); the only minor constraint is expected cDNA duplication (38.95%, scored 80/100) that does not compromise expression quantification. All measurements are confirmed and support confident transcript analysis.
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