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
29/100 · FStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Whole-genome sequencing of Acinetobacter pittii on an Illumina HiSeq 2000 yields ~3.9 million reads at moderate base quality (83.3% ≥Q20, 70.9% ≥Q30), enabling genome assembly of this related opportunistic pathogen for comparison with A. baumannii and identification of species-specific genomic features. The lower quality suggests possible technical issues or this species' genomic characteristics. Reuse requires validation and quality control.
The F 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