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.
1 further paper cites this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.
Deep data QC
47/100 · FStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
This Micrococcales bacterium WGS dataset from the Illumina HiSeq 2000 platform contains only 332 reads (1.85 million bases) with zero quality reported (0% Q20, 0% Q30 bytes), indicating severe undersequencing or data quality issues. The minimal read count and lack of quality metrics make this dataset unsuitable for analysis. Search terms: bacterial genomics, incomplete sequencing, data quality control, highlighting the importance of sequencing depth validation.
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.
measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0