{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025, 'fraction_numerical': 0.023958333333333335, 'mean_word_length': 4.491428571428571, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison of diethyl ether and ethyl acetate as extracting agents for recovery of Ascaris spp. and Trichuris spp. eggs.

Ethyl acetate and diethyl ether were compared for their ability to recover Ascaris spp. and Trichuris spp. eggs from seeded milorganite, liquid sludge, and cabbage. Concentrations of 10, 100, and 1000 eggs/10 g test sample were prepared for 20 replicates of each product. The use of diethyl ether yielded fewer eggs/10 g than did ethyl acetate in 5 of 6 sets of data. For Ascaris spp., recovery from cabbage was 10 times higher with ethyl acetate at the higher concentration than with diethyl ether. For Trichuris spp., recovery from liquid sludge was slightly higher with diethyl ether for all egg concentrations. The other results ranged from 0 to 23% difference in recovery for the 2 agents. Depending on the parasites in question and the products to be screened, the substitution of ethyl acetate for diethyl ether may be significant.