Corpus 1,272 assessed · 1,173 scored · 643 reproduced ≥75 · 168 flagged ·∅ 74.1/100
← Dataset search

SRR29254823

SRA

Provenance — who produced it, who reused it

Linked to 0 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.

No linked papers found in the corpus yet.

Deep data QC

90/100 · A

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

What this means
claude:haiku

Whole-genome shotgun metagenomic sequencing of a microbial community via Illumina HiSeq 4000 with 151 bp reads and good quality (94.7% Q20), enabling strain identification and genomic profiling of mixed populations. High GC content (66.3%) suggests enrichment for specific bacterial taxa; assembly quality depends on community complexity and sequence coverage.

Data type / assay
WGS
Organism
metagenome
Instrument
Illumina HiSeq 4000
Platform
ILLUMINA
N numbers (samples, groups)
1 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok yes reported
total bases 52921094122 reported
total reads 199977981 reported
n content pct 0 measured
pct q20 bases 94.7 measured
pct q30 bases 88.2 measured
gc content pct 66.3 measured
mean read length 151 measured
mean base quality 34.8 measured
adapter content pct 0.09 measured
duplication rate pct 13.91 measured
How this grade was computed
Weighted mean of 3 scored metric(s) → 90/100

The A 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.

pct q30 bases 88.2 measured ×1 91%
duplication rate pct 13.91 measured ×0.5 82%
adapter content pct 0.09 measured ×0.4 100%
QC cost 8 s compute

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

Scientific quality

Based on hands-on reproduction of the papers that use this dataset. A reproducible paper that stands on this data is positive evidence; a flagged one is a prompt to look closer — never a verdict on the dataset itself without the evidence.

1 studies use it