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

SRR6452987

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

96/100 · A

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

What this means
claude:haiku

High-quality bulk RNA-seq of Hymenophyllum dentatum. Grade A, 96/100 with all metrics measured. Elevated duplication (39.7%) is the main limitation, likely from highly expressed genes and can introduce variance in transcript abundance. Q30 bases (89.8%) and mean quality (34.9) are otherwise excellent, enabling use with duplicate-aware normalization.

Data type / assay
bulk-RNA-seq
Organism
Hymenophyllum dentatum
Instrument
Illumina HiSeq 2000
Platform
ILLUMINA
N numbers (samples, groups)
1 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok yes reported
total bases 6828805132 reported
total reads 33805966 reported
n content pct 0.002 measured
pct q20 bases 95.1 measured
pct q30 bases 89.8 measured
gc content pct 50.5 measured
mean read length 101 measured
mean base quality 34.9 measured
adapter content pct 0.14 measured
duplication rate pct 39.73 measured
How this grade was computed
Weighted mean of 4 scored metric(s) → 96/100

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 89.8 measured ×1 99%
mean base quality 34.9 measured ×0.6 100%
adapter content pct 0.14 measured ×0.4 100%
duplication rate pct 39.73 measured ×0.4 78%
QC cost 12 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