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
91/100 · AStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
WGS short-read data (E. coli), grade A but flagged by 25.75% duplication in a small genome, suggesting PCR overamplification. Exceptional 170.2x extrapolated coverage and perfect quality metrics (Q30 91.4%, zero adapters) dominate; however, excess coverage paired with high duplication may mask read errors. Suitable for assembly with awareness of potential bias.
The A 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