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

SRR5195043

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

Bulk RNA-seq (HiSeq 2000, Hymenophyllum caudiculatum, 101bp reads). A-grade (100/100) perfect-score dataset. Outstanding base quality (mean 35.1), excellent Q30 (89.9%), minimal duplication (22.51%), and negligible N-content (0.088%) all achieve maximum scores. Reference-quality for transcriptome assembly, annotation validation, and meta-analysis.

Data type / assay
bulk-RNA-seq
Organism
Hymenophyllum caudiculatum
Instrument
Illumina HiSeq 2000
Platform
ILLUMINA
N numbers (samples, groups)
1 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok yes reported
total bases 7623092362 reported
total reads 37738081 reported
n content pct 0.088 measured
pct q20 bases 94.8 measured
pct q30 bases 89.9 measured
gc content pct 48.7 measured
mean read length 101 measured
mean base quality 35.1 measured
adapter content pct 0.19 measured
duplication rate pct 22.51 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 89.9 measured ×1 100%
mean base quality 35.1 measured ×0.6 100%
adapter content pct 0.19 measured ×0.4 100%
duplication rate pct 22.51 measured ×0.4 100%
QC cost 10 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 1 flagged mean score 62