SRX532394
SRAProvenance — who produced it, who reused it
Linked to 2 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.
2 further papers cite this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.
Deep data QC
99/100 · AStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
This is bulk RNA-seq from Japanese pear (Pyrus pyrifolia) on an Illumina HiSeq 2000, and it earns a well-justified A (99/100): the grade rests almost entirely on directly measured quality metrics rather than extrapolation, so the reading is solid rather than provisional. The strongest driver is base quality — 89.5% of bases at Q30 and a mean base quality of 35.7 — meaning the vast majority of basecalls are reliable, which is what matters most for confident read alignment and expression quantification; the single small deduction comes from Q30 falling just short of perfect, a minor and expected loss for HiSeq 2000 chemistry. Equally reassuring for reuse, adapter content is effectively zero and N-content is negligible (0.025%), so reads need little trimming, while the 18.5% duplication rate is unremarkable for RNA-seq, where highly expressed transcripts naturally produce duplicate reads rather than signaling a library artifact. The main caveat is technical rather than qualitative: the short 36 bp mean read length limits multi-mapping resolution and makes this dataset better suited to gene-level quantification than to isoform discovery or splice-junction analysis.
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.
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.