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
97/100 · AStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
RNA-Seq of Bemisia tabaci on an Illumina HiSeq 2000 yields ~6.9 million reads at exceptional base quality (100% ≥Q20, 100% ≥Q30), providing high-confidence transcriptome data for this whitefly pest with unusually high reported quality scores suggesting potential data processing artifacts requiring verification. The dataset supports gene expression studies if quality metrics are confirmed. Independent QC assessment is essential.
The A 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