SRR1779348

ENA first seen 2015

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.

Reused by

1 further paper cites this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.

Deep data QC

66/100 · D

Standardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured

What this means

claude:haiku

WGS from Homo sapiens with grade-D and low evidence_strength (0.61); mean coverage 10.4× (extrapolated, not yet measured) falls well short of the 30× standard for clinical WGS, limiting variant sensitivity and specificity. Base quality (Q30=91%) is acceptable but depth is the bottleneck. Deep measured resequencing advised; provisional reading pending.

Data type / assay

WGS

Organism

Homo sapiens

Instrument

Illumina HiSeq 2500

Platform

ILLUMINA

Read type

short-read

Files available

FASTQ (raw reads)

N numbers (samples, groups)

1 runs

Metrics (value · how obtained)

checksum ok yes reported

total bases 32124344820 reported

total reads 159031410 reported

mean coverage 10.4 extrapolated

n content pct 0.04 measured

pct q20 bases 95 measured

pct q30 bases 91 measured

gc content pct 45.6 measured

mean read length 101 measured

mean base quality 35.6 measured

adapter content pct 0.7 measured

duplication rate pct 3.54 measured

How this grade was computed

Weighted mean of 4 scored metric(s) → 66/100

The D 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.

mean coverage 10.4 extrapolated ×1.2 11%

pct q30 bases 91 measured ×1 100%

duplication rate pct 3.54 measured ×0.5 100%

adapter content pct 0.7 measured ×0.4 100%

QC cost 1.1 min compute

measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0