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
SARS-CoV-2 amplicon short-read data (Grade D). Despite excellent base quality (96.6% Q30+), high adapter content (25.62%) remains the primary QC failure—critical because contamination undermines variant confidence in amplicon work. Extreme duplication (90.99%) suggests PCR bias; reuse requires vigorous trimming and variant-level validation.
The D grade is a transparent weighted average. Each metric below scored from 0–100% against the published amplicon 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