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
88/100 · BStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Bulk RNA-seq from insect (Riptortus pedestris) on NovaSeq 6000. Grade B (88/100) with excellent base composition (Q20 98.3%, Q30 94.8%, adapters 0%) but duplication at 63.7% is critical, scoring only 25/100 and dominating the grade reduction. All metrics measured; the high duplication suggests potential PCR or library bias that could skew expression estimates and limit reusability for quantitative studies.
The B 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