SRR3144567

SRA first seen 2021

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

44/100 · F

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

What this means

claude:haiku

HiSeq 4000 RNA-seq from Apis mellifera (13.2M reads, 3.3 billion bases, 47% GC, 64.8% ≥Q30) shows poor base quality (64.8% ≥Q30, 81.4% ≥Q20) despite using a high-end sequencer. The data suits abundant transcript detection rather than sensitive profiling.

Data type / assay

bulk-RNA-seq

Organism

Apis mellifera

Instrument

Illumina HiSeq 4000

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 3315633804 reported

total reads 13157277 reported

n content pct 0.009 measured

pct q20 bases 81.4 measured

pct q30 bases 64.8 measured

gc content pct 47 measured

mean read length 126 measured

mean base quality 30.6 measured

adapter content pct 0 measured

duplication rate pct 20.55 measured

How this grade was computed

Weighted mean of 4 scored metric(s) → 44/100

The F 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.

pct q30 bases 64.8 measured ×1 0%

mean base quality 30.6 measured ×0.6 43%

adapter content pct 0 measured ×0.4 100%

duplication rate pct 20.55 measured ×0.4 100%

QC cost 33 s compute

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