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
72/100 · CStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Whole-genome sequencing of Dhillonvirus on NextSeq 500 (136 bp). Grade C (72/100) with measured duplication at 69.11% (scores 0/100), which is the critical bottleneck; Q30 is adequate at 89.2% but duplication dominates. All metrics measured; the extreme duplication rate suggests significant PCR bias or contamination, severely limiting utility for variant calling or SNP discovery.
The C grade is a transparent weighted average. Each metric below scored from 0–100% against the published WGS 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