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

SRR6189089

SRA

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

53/100 · F

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

What this means
claude:haiku

Whole-genome sequencing; unsuitable (grade F). Dual failures: high duplication (48.56%) suggests sequencing artifacts, and severely low coverage (12.2×, extrapolated) is underpowered for standard applications. Evidence strength is provisional. Do not reuse.

Data type / assay
WGS
Organism
Gallus gallus
Instrument
Illumina HiSeq 2000
Platform
ILLUMINA
N numbers (samples, groups)
1 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok yes reported
total bases 13385123915 reported
total reads 72216335 reported
mean coverage 12.2 extrapolated
n content pct 0.002 measured
pct q20 bases 99.5 measured
pct q30 bases 96.6 measured
gc content pct 43.6 measured
mean read length 92.8 measured
mean base quality 37.5 measured
adapter content pct 0 measured
duplication rate pct 48.56 measured
How this grade was computed
Weighted mean of 4 scored metric(s) → 53/100

The F 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.

mean coverage 12.2 extrapolated ×1.2 19%
pct q30 bases 96.6 measured ×1 100%
duplication rate pct 48.56 measured ×0.5 0%
adapter content pct 0 measured ×0.4 100%
QC cost 22 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 reproduced mean score 91