ENAapplication/xmlftp://ftp.sra.ebi.ac.uk/vol1/fastq/SRR292/039/SRR29232739/SRR29232739_2.fastq.gzftp://ftp.sra.ebi.ac.uk/vol1/fastq/SRR292/041/SRR29232741/SRR29232741_1.fastq.gzftp://ftp.sra.ebi.ac.uk/vol1/fastq/SRR292/039/SRR29232739/SRR29232739_1.fastq.gzftp://ftp.sra.ebi.ac.uk/vol1/fastq/SRR292/040/SRR29232740/SRR29232740_2.fastq.gzftp://ftp.sra.ebi.ac.uk/vol1/fastq/SRR292/038/SRR29232738/SRR29232738_1.fastq.gzftp://ftp.sra.ebi.ac.uk/vol1/fastq/SRR292/040/SRR29232740/SRR29232740_1.fastq.gzftp://ftp.sra.ebi.ac.uk/vol1/fastq/SRR292/041/SRR29232741/SRR29232741_2.fastq.gzftp://ftp.sra.ebi.ac.uk/vol1/fastq/SRR292/038/SRR29232738/SRR29232738_2.fastq.gzprimary200OKGenomicsEast China university of Science and Technologyhttps://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJNA1118181Here we performed RNA-seq to examine gene expression difference in regular culture and H2O2 treated cells. Two strains were used here: GS115 (wild-type) and GS115-delta PAS_chr1-4_0287/PAS_chr1-1_0102/PAS_chr2-2_0494 (H3K36me3 deficient strain).ENAfalseGene expression pattern change upon H2O2 treatment in P. pastoris2024-06-122024-06-12PRJNA1118181