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 sequencing with poor reusability. Grade D driven by adapter_content_pct=19.41 (measured), which scores 0/100 despite excellent base quality (Q30=98.8%). Residual primer/adapter sequences in amplicon data skew viral abundance estimates and complicate variant calling; requires aggressive trimming before reuse. Base quality alone does not salvage this run.
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