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
37/100 · FStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Drosophila melanogaster WGS via Illumina Genome Analyzer with low coverage (12.3×) from 48M reads but problematic base quality (79.5% Q20, 0% Q30) indicating data integrity issues. Minimal coverage and absent Q30 support severely limit variant detection sensitivity and reliability. Reuse is not recommended for primary WGS applications; data quality and coverage are below standard thresholds for confident fly genetics.
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