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

SRR3417193

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

100/100 · A

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

What this means
claude:haiku

RNA-seq of the calcareous sponge *Grantia compressa* using Illumina HiSeq 2000 with 101 bp reads and excellent quality (97.6% Q20), enabling reliable transcript assembly and quantification. Higher depth (32.6M reads) than related datasets improves detection of lowly-expressed transcripts relevant to developmental or tissue-specific studies.

Data type / assay
bulk-RNA-seq
Organism
Grantia compressa
Instrument
Illumina HiSeq 2000
Platform
ILLUMINA
N numbers (samples, groups)
1 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok yes reported
total bases 6584905888 reported
total reads 32598544 reported
n content pct 0.001 measured
pct q20 bases 97.6 measured
pct q30 bases 94.3 measured
gc content pct 50.2 measured
mean read length 101 measured
mean base quality 36.2 measured
adapter content pct 1.03 measured
duplication rate pct 15.43 measured
How this grade was computed
Weighted mean of 4 scored metric(s) → 100/100

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.

pct q30 bases 94.3 measured ×1 100%
mean base quality 36.2 measured ×0.6 100%
adapter content pct 1.03 measured ×0.4 100%
duplication rate pct 15.43 measured ×0.4 100%
QC cost 7 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 mean score 50