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
79/100 · CStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
RNA-Seq of Quillaja saponaria on an Illumina HiSeq 4000 generates ~31.4 million reads at exceptional base quality (100% ≥Q20, 100% ≥Q30), enabling high-confidence transcriptome profiling of this medicinal plant for studies of saponin biosynthesis and secondary metabolism. The reported perfect quality scores are implausible and warrant independent verification. Reuse requires validation of quality metrics.
The C 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