DESC:FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to the field of pesticides. The present invention in particular relates to a synergistic, broad spectrum insecticidal composition comprising Dinotefuron, Thiamethoxam and Pymetrozine. The present invention further relates to the process of preparation of said composition and uses thereof.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Protection of crops and its produce from insect pest damage is essential for enhancement of agriculture produce. Even with the availability of alternative types of pest control, chemical control remains an important tool for the prevention and control of pests in agriculture, especially insect pests. Insecticides of varied types and structural groups have been reported in literature and a large number are in commercial use. However, judicious use of such chemical pesticides is absolutely needed to protect the environment and natural ecosystems. In this regard, application of insecticidal combinations has emerged as an attractive approach to ensure that the chemical load in the environment is reduced. However, not all chemical insecticidal actives are compatible with each other, and therefore requires a great amount of experimentation and effort to develop an efficacious pesticidal combination, which is stable and effective in controlling the insect pests in economically important agricultural crops.
IN 202311048489 provides a novel, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising Chlorantraniliprole, Lambda cyhalothrin, Thiamethoxam as active ingredients and clove oil as a synergist. The insecticidal composition of the present invention is particularly effective in controlling lepidopteran pests particularly early shoot borer in sugarcane crop.
IN 202221032607 A1 generically enables the combination of combination of; (a) one or more insecticide selected from Tolfenpyrad, Chlorantraniliprole, Cyantraniliprole, Cyclaniliprole or Flubendiamide; (b) one or more insecticide selected from class of neonicotinoids such as Fipronil, Dinotefuran, Ethiprole, Sulfoxaflor, Acetamiprid, Clothianidin, Imidacloprid, Nitenpyram, Nithiazine, Thiacloprid or Thiamethoxam; and (c) optionally one or more insecticide selected from class of pyrethroids such as Deltamethrin, Lambda-cyhalothrin, Bifenthrin, Esfenvalerate, Fenpropathrin, Fenvalerate, Tau-fluvalinate, Permethrin, Cypermethrin, Alpha-cypermethrin or Beta-cyfluthrin; alongwith agrochemically acceptable adjuvant, for effective management of insect-pest complex on variety of crops/fruits/vegetables.
There is therefore a continued need to develop insecticidal compositions that provide multiple advantages including to enable increase in the crop yields, to provide a composition with high synergistic action, to provide a combination where the dosage of the active ingredients is reduced as compared to the individual recommended dosage, to avoid excess loading of the toxicant to the environment and to negligibly impact environmental safety. The present invention aims to provide such an insecticidal composition with aforesaid advantageous features. More importantly, the present invention aims at providing a composition wherein the insecticidal activity of the insecticidal composition is considerably higher than the sum of the activities of the individual active compounds and that results into good enhancement in crop yield.

OBJECTS OF THE INVENTION
It is an object of the present invention to provide a novel, stable, synergistic, insecticidal composition comprising Dinotefuron, Thiamethoxam and pymetrozine as its ingredients.
It is another object of the present invention to provide an insecticidal composition comprising Dinotefuron and Thiamethoxam as insecticidal active ingredients and pymetrozine as a synergist.
It is yet another object of the present invention to provide an insecticidal composition with enhanced bioefficacy at reduced dosage as compared to individual insecticides when used in isolation.
It is yet another object of the present invention to provide an insecticidal composition that result in good enhancement in crop yield.
It is yet another object of the present invention to provide an insecticidal composition that is environmentally safe and non-phytotoxic.
It is yet another object of the present invention to provide an insecticidal composition that has broad spectrum activity and can be used in a wide variety of agricultural crops.
It is yet another object the present invention is to provide wettable dispersible granule composition comprising combination of Dinotefuron, Thiamethoxam and Pymetrozine or its salt, surfactants, hydrocarbon solvent, co-solvent and optionally other agrochemical auxiliaries.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
Accordingly, in one aspect, the present invention provides a novel, stable,synergistic, environmentally safe, broad spectrum, cost effective insecticidal composition comprising dinotefuron as the first active ingredient, thiamethoxam as the second active ingredient and pymetrozine as the third active ingredient as a synergist.
In another aspect, the present invention provides a novel, stable, synergistic, environment friendly, broad spectrum, cost effective insecticidal composition that is effective in controlling white plant hopper and Black plant hopper insect-pests on Rice crop.
In another aspect, the present invention provides a stable formulation comprising said insecticidal composition. In a preferred aspect, said insecticidal composition is formulated as an wettable dispersible granule.
In yet another aspect, the present invention provides a process for preparing said insecticidal composition.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
Those skilled in the art will be aware that the invention described herein is subject to variations and modifications other than those specifically described. It is to be understood that the invention described herein includes all such variations and modifications. The invention also includes all such steps, features, compositions and compounds referred to or indicated in this specification, individually or collectively, and all combinations of any two or more of said steps or features.
Unless otherwise specified, all terms used in disclosing the invention, including technical and scientific terms, have the meaning as commonly understood by one of the ordinary skill in the art to which the invention belongs. For further guidance, term definitions may be included to better appreciate the teaching of the present invention.
As used herein, the term “plant” refers to any plant or part thereof including serial and subterranean parts of the plant. It is contemplated that the parts of the plant may be for example, flowers, fruits or vegetables, shoots, leaves, needles, stalks, stems, fruiting bodies, seeds also roots and that parts of the plants may or may not be attached to the remainder of the plant.
The term “locus” of a plant as used herein is intended to embrace the place on which the plants are growing, where the plant propagation materials of the plants are sown or where the plant propagation materials of the plants will be placed into the soil.
The term “plant propagation material” is understood to denote generative parts of a plant, such as seeds, vegetative material such as cuttings or tubers, roots, fruits, tubers, bulbs, rhizomes and parts of plants, germinated plants and young plants which are to be transplanted after germination or after emergence from the soil. These young plants may be protected before transplantation by a total or partial treatment by immersion.
It is to be understood that the singular forms “a,” “an,” and “the” include plural referents unless the context clearly dictates otherwise.
It should be emphasized that the term “comprises/comprising” when used in this specification is taken to specify the presence of stated features, steps or components but does not preclude the presence or addition of one or more other features, steps, components or groups thereof.
The term "insects" as used herein, includes all organisms in the class "Insecta."
The term "Insecticidal" as used herein, refers to the ability of a pesticide to increase mortality or inhibit growth rate of insects.
The terms “weight percent”, “wt-%”, “percent by weight”, “% by weight” and variations thereof, as used herein, refer to the concentration of a substance as the weight of that substance divided by the total weight of the composition and multiplied by 100. It is understood that, as used here, “percent “, “%” and the like are intended to be synonymous with “weight percent”, “wt. %”, etc.
The term “synergist” as used herein refers to a material which enhances the activity of other materials such as insecticides so that the overall activity of the composition is greater than the sum of the individual ingredients.
Features that are described and/or illustrated with respect to one embodiment may be used in the same way or in a similar way in one or more other embodiments and/or in combination with or instead of the features of the other embodiments.
Dinotefuran is an insecticide of the neonicotinoid class developed by Mitsui Chemicals for control of insect pests such as aphids, whiteflies, thrips, leafhoppers, leafminers, sawflies, mole cricket, white grubs, lacebugs, billbugs, beetles, mealybugs, and cockroaches on leafy vegetables, Its mechanism of action involves disruption of the insect's nervous system by inhibiting nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. In order to avoid harming beneficial insects such as bees, it should not be applied during bloom.
Thiamethoxam is the ISO common name for a mixture of cis-trans isomers used as a systemic insecticide of the neonicotinoid class. It has a broad spectrum of activity against many types of insects and can be used as a seed dressing.
Pymetrozine is a new insecticide, highly active and specific against sucking insect pests. Pymetrozine is the only representative of the pyridine azomethines, a new class of insecticides, and is currently being developed worldwide for control of aphids and whiteflies in field crops, vegetables, ornamentals, cotton, hop, deciduous fruit, and citrus, and of the brown planthopper, Nilaparvata lugens (Staol), in rice
The present invention thus provides an insecticidal composition comprising a) Dinotefuron as the first active ingredient b) Thiamethoxam as the second active ingredient and c) Pymetrozine as the third active ingredients. Wherein Dinotefuron is present in an amount ranging from 05-30% w/w, Thiamethoxam is present in an amount ranging from 10-35% w/w and pymetrozine is present in an amount ranging from 10-40% w/w the insecticidal composition.
In a preferred embodiment, Dinotefuron is present in an amount 12%w/w, Thiamethoxam is present in an amount of 22.5%w/w and pymetrozine is present in an amount of 30% w/w of the insecticidal composition.
In an embodiment, the insecticidal composition of the present invention comprising the said actives exhibits synergistic effect in control of insects in agricultural crops, particularly arthropod insects in Rice crop, particularly white back plant hopper and Brown plant hopper.
In an embodiment, the insecticidal composition of the present invention may be applied to a variety of agricultural crops like brinjal, colecrops, cucurbits, cotton, tea, ornamentals, horticultural crops and oil seed crops.
In a more preferred embodiment, the insecticidal composition of the present invention is forulated in the form of a wettable dispersible concentrate comprising a dispersing agent, a wetting agent, and Antifoam agent.
As used herein, the term “defoaming agent” or “defoamer” or “anti-foaming agent” refers to an excipient that reduces and hinders the formation of foam in the liquid, semi-solid, or solid formulations.
Defoamer is selected from the group comprising of, but not limited to, silicone compounds such as dimethyl polysiloxane emulsion, silicon and organic fluorine compounds. These defoaming agents may be used alone or in combination thereof. Preferably, the synergistic insecticidal composition comprises silicon as defoamer. The defoamer is present in an amount in the range from 0.5 to 2.0% w/w.
The wetting agent is selected from alkyl phenol ethoxylate, fatty oil ethoxylate, phenyl naphthalene sulphonates, alkyl naphthalene sulfonates, sodium alkyl naphthalene sulfonate, sodium salt of sulfonated alkyl carboxylate, dioctyl sulfosuccinate sodium salt, polyoxyalkylated ethyl phenols, polyoxyethoxylated fatty alcohols, polyoxyethoxylated fatty amines, lignin derivatives, alkane sulfonates, alpha olefin sulfonates, alkylbenzene sulfonates, salts of polycarboxylic acids, salts of esters of sulfosuccinic acid, octyl phenol ether sulphate, anionic phosphate esters, disodium laureth sulfosuccinate, diisodecyl sodium sulfosuccinate, alkylnaphthalenesulfonates, alkylbenzenesulfonates, alkylpolyglycol ether sulfonates, alkyl ether phosphates, alkyl ether sulfates and alkyl sulfosuccinic monoesters, and mixtures thereof. Preferably, the synergistic insecticidal composition comprises sodium lauryl sulphate. The wetting agent is present in an amount of from 2% to 5%w/w by weight based on a total weight of the composition.
The dispersing agent is selected from the group comprising of lignosulphonates, phenyl naphthalene sulphonates, condensed methyl naphthalene sulfonate, polyaromatic sulfonates, sodium alkyl aryl sulfonates, maleic anhydride copolymers, phosphate esters, condensation products of aryl/alkyl sulphonic acids and formaldehyde, addition products of ethylene oxide and fatty acid esters, polycarboxylates alkali earth metal salt of alkylbenzene sulfonate, calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate, salts of sulfonated naphthalene, polystyrenated acrylated co- polymer, salts of polyacrylic acids, salts of phenol sulfonic acids, and mixtures thereof. Preferably, the synergistic insecticidal composition comprises silicon as Sodium ligno sulphonate. The dispersing agent is present in an amount of from 5% to 10%w/w by weight based on a total weight of the composition.
In an embodiment, the insecticidal composition is formulated in a form selected from the group comprising water-soluble concentrates (SL), emulsifiable concentrates (EC), emulsions (EW), micro-emulsions (ME), Suspension concentrates (SC), oil-based suspension concentrates (OD), flowable suspensions (FS), water-dispersible granules (WG), water-soluble granules (SG), wettable powders (WP), water soluble powders (SP), granules (GR), encapsulated granules (CG), fine granules (FG), macrogranules (GG), dry flowables (DF), aqueous Suspo-emulsions (SE), capsule suspensions (CS) and micro granules (MG). In a preferred embodiment, the Insecticidal composition is in the form of suspension concentrates (SC), water-dispersible granule (WDG) and wettable powder (WP).
In a preferred embodiment, the Insecticidal composition of the present invention is formulated as an Wettable dispersible granules.
Examples-:
The examples below are given solely for the purpose of illustration and are not to be construed as limitations of the present invention, as many variations thereof are possible without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.
Example 1: Preparation of Insecticidal composition as Wettable dispersible granules (WDG).
In an embodiment, the chemical composition of the present insecticidal is depicted below in Table 1 (a) below:
Table-1 (a): Composition of the Insecticidal composition
S.no. Ingredients Percentage range
1 Dinotefuron technical (Basis of 100.0%) 5-30% w/w
2 Thiamethoxam technical (Basis of 100.0%) 10-35% w/w
3 Pymetrozine Technical (Basis of 100.0%) 10-40% w/w
4 Sodium ligno sulphonate (dispersing agent) 05-10% w/w
5 Sodium lauryl sulphate (wetting agent) 02-5% w/w
6 Silicon based Antifoam 0.5-02% w/w
7 Anhydrous citric acid 01-03% w/w
China clay Q.S

In a preferred embodiment, the chemical composition of the present insecticidal composition is depicted below in Table 1(b)
Table-1 (b): Preferred composition of the Insecticidal composition.
Sno Ingredients Percentage
%w/w
1 Dinotefuron technical (Basis of 100.0%) 12% w/w
2 Thiamethoxam technical (Basis of 100.0%) 22.50% w/w
3 Pymetrozine Technical (Basis of 100.0%) 30% w/w
4 Sodium ligno sulphonate dispersing agent) 8.50% w/w
5 Sodium lauryl sulphate (wetting agent) 3% w/w
6 Silicon based Antifoam 01.50% w/w
7 Anhydrous citric acid 1.10% w/w
China clay Q.S
Total Quantity 100%

Preparation method of Wettable dispersible granules:
Step- 1:- Weighed required quantity of china clay into the premixing blender then add Sodium ligno sulphonate and Sodium lauryl sulphate and mixed it for half an hour .
Step -2:- The above homogenous mixed mass and anhydrous citric acid were mixed for another half an hour
Step -3:- Mixed the Pymetrozine and Dinotefuron one by one into blender and adds Thiamethoxam to it, and again mixed it for 1 hour.
Step -4:-After mixing 1 hr material take to milling with ACM/Jet mill to get desirable particle size (=15µm).
Step -5:- After milling, material shifted to post blender followed by dough mixing with water (10-15%).
Step -6:- Now dough is subjected to granulation with basket extruder.
Step -7: Granules dried through FBD @60°C for 30 min.

Table-1(c): Quality parameters of WDG formulation
Parameter Desired quality
Description/ physical appearance Material shall be in the form of white to free flowing suspension
A.I. content of Pymetrozine 30% w/w (±5%)
Dinotefuron 12%w/w (±5%)
Thiamethoxam 22.5%w/w(±5%)
Suspensibility shall not be less than 60% w/w.
Persistence of foam Not more than 60ml in 12 min
Water content 12% max.
pH of 1% aq. Solution 4.0- 9.0
Acidity/Alkalinity 0.5% max
Heat stability test Take 100ml sample & keep it in 54°C±2 for 14 days check for all parameters listed above thereafter
Cold stability test Take 100ml sample & keep it in 5°C±2 for 14 days.

Example-2: Field evaluation of the bio-efficacy of the present Insecticidal composition.
The presently disclosed insecticidal tri-mix was tested for its bioefficacy against Brown plant hopper and white back plant hopper on Rice crop. The plants were aligned in a plot size of 25 square meter. The trial was carried out in a Pusa-1509 variety of Rice in Karnal, Haryana. The trial was laid out in a random block design consisting of a total of 9 treatments in three replications. 1st application just after initiation of insect-pests at Economic threshold Level (ETL) at 40-50 days after transplanting of rice and followed by 15day intervals.
Measured quantity of the chemical was added to required volume of water @ 500L/ha for spraying. The spray tank was filled with ½ the quantity of clean required volume of water and then the measured chemical (according to the dose) was added followed by the rest half quantity of water. The solution was stirred well and thorough coverage was ensured.
PROTOCOL A : Table-2: Below provides the treatment details in Rice crop.
Treatments Treatment details Dose (g a.i./ha) Dose (Formulation/ha)
T-1 Untreated - -
T-2 Dinotefuran 20% SG 40 200 gm
T-3 Thiamethoxam 25% WG 25 100 gm
T-4 Pymetrozine50% WDG 150 300 gm
T-5 Dinotefuran 20% SG+ Thiamethoxam 25% WG+ Pymetrozine 50% WDG 40 + 25 + 150 600 gm
T-6 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 33.60 + 63.00 + 84.00 280 gm
T-7 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 42.00 + 78.75 + 105.00 350 gm
T-8 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 50.40 + 94.50 + 126.00 420 gm
T-9 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 58.80 + 110.25 + 147.00 490 gm

EVALUATION OF BIO-EFFICACY IN RICE CROP
Evaluation of bioefficacy for Plant hoppers (Brown Plant Hopper &White Back Plant Hopper)

Brown Plant Hopper (BPH) and White Back Plant Hopper (WBPH) population was recorded on 10 hills before treatment (Pre-treatment count: PTC) and 5, 10, 15 Days After each Treatment (DAT) and Percent Reduction Over Control of Plant hopper (BPH/WBPH) was calculated by using the following formula.
% Reduction Over Control=(No.of insects in control-No.of insects in treated )/(No.of insects in control) x100

Table-3: Plant hoppers (BPH & WBPH) control 15 days after first application (Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG)
(Code: JU (3) PI-122230)
Sr. No. Treatment details Doseg (a.i./ha) Dose (Formulation/ha) Control Observed (%) Control Expected (%) Colby’s Ratio Synergism (Y/N)
T-1 Untreated - - 0.00
T-2 Dinotefuran 20% SG 40 200 gm 36.39
T-3 Thiamethoxam 25% WG 25 100 gm 26.42
T-4 Pymetrozine 50% WDG 150 300 gm 39.08
T-5 Dinotefuran 20% SG+ Thiamethoxam 25% WG+ Pymetrozine 50% WDG 40 + 25 + 150 600 gm 74.39
T-6 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 33.60 + 63.00 + 84.00 280 gm 69.54 58.82 1.18 Y
T-7 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 42.00 + 78.75 + 105.00 350 gm 74.39 60.47 1.23 Y
T-8 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 50.40 + 94.50 + 126.00 420 gm 74.66 71.34 1.05 Y
T-9 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 58.80 + 110.25 + 147.00 490 gm 75.47 73.05 1.03 Y

Table-4: Plant hoppers (BPH & WBPH) control 15 days after second application (Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG)
(Code: JU (3) PI-122230)
Sr. No. Treatment details Dose
g (a.i./ha) Dose (Formulation/ha) Control Observed (%) Control Expected (%) Colby’s Ratio Synergism (Y/N)
T-1 Untreated - - 0.00
T-2 Dinotefuran 20% SG 40 200 gm 37.69
T-3 Thiamethoxam 25% WG 25 100 gm 29.49
T-4 Pymetrozine 50% WDG 150 300 gm 39.91
T-5 Dinotefuran 20% SG+ Thiamethoxam 25% WG+ Pymetrozine 50% WDG 40 + 25 + 150 600 gm 90.91
T-6 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 33.60 + 63.00 + 84.00 280 gm 86.03 72.13 1.19 y
T-7 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 42.00 + 78.75 + 105.00 350 gm 90.91 75.02 1.21 y
T-8 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 50.40 + 94.50 + 126.00 420 gm 91.13 75.82 1.20 y
T-9 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 58.80 + 110.25 + 147.00 490 gm 91.80 77.34 1.19 y

Abbreviations:
g a.i./ha: gram of active ingredient per hectare
BPH & WBPH: Brown Plant Hopper & White Back Plant Hopper
PTC: Pre-Treatment Count
DAT: Days After Treatment
Example-4: Evaluation of Phytotoxicity of the present Insecticidal composition
Visual observations were recorded at 3, 7 and 10 days after application (DAA) of testing products. The parameters observed were leaf injury on tip/surface, necrosis, vein clearing, epinasty, hyponasty and wilting. For the rating on phytotoxicity the core Scale of 0 – 10 was followed for leaf injury on 5 tips/surface.

Table 5: Phytotoxicity symptoms scoring and rating for leaf injury on tip/surface

Leaf injury on tips/surface Rating
0% 0
1-10% 1
11-20% 2
21-30% 3
31-40% 4
41-50% 5
51-60% 6
61-70% 7
71-80% 8
81-90% 9
91-100% 10

Table-6: Phytotoxicity of Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG against Plant hoppers (BPH& WBPH) on Rice (After First Application)
(Code: JU (3) PI-122230)
Sr. No. Treatment details Dose
g (a.i./ha) Dose (Formulation/ha) 1 DAT 3 DAT 5 DAT 7 DAT 10 DAT
T-1 Untreated - - 0 0 0 0 0
T-2 Dinotefuran 20% SG 40 200 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-3 Thiamethoxam 25% WG 25 100 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-4 Pymetrozine 50% WDG 150 300 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-5 Dinotefuran 20% SG+ Thiamethoxam 25% WG+ Pymetrozine 50% WDG 40 + 25 + 150 600 gm 1 2 3 4 5
T-6 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 33.60 + 63.00 + 84.00 280 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-7 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 42.00 + 78.75 + 105.00 350 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-8 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 50.40 + 94.50 + 126.00 420 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-9 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 58.80 + 110.25 + 147.00 490 gm 0 0 0 0 0

Table-7: Phytotoxicity of Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG against Plant hopper (BPH & WBPH) on Rice (After Second Application)
(Code: JU (3) PI-122230)
Sr. No. Treatment details Dose
g (a.i./ha) Dose (Formulation/ha) 1 DAT 3 DAT 5 DAT 7 DAT 10 DAT
T-1 Untreated - - 0 0 0 0 0
T-2 Dinotefuran 20% SG 40 200 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-3 Thiamethoxam 25% WG 25 100 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-4 Pymetrozine 50% WDG 150 300 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-5 Dinotefuran 20% SG+ Thiamethoxam 25% WG+ Pymetrozine 50% WDG 40 + 25 + 150 600 gm 1 2 3 4 5
T-6 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 33.60 + 63.00 + 84.00 280 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-7 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 42.00 + 78.75 + 105.00 350 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-8 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 50.40 + 94.50 + 126.00 420 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-9 Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG 58.80 + 110.25 + 147.00 490 gm 0 0 0 0 0

Discussion of Results:
Table 3 and 4 (Protocol-A):
The results presented in Table 3 and 4 highlight the promising efficacy of the recently developed Novel Trimix-Insecticide Combination/Formulation, labeled as JU (3) PI-122230. This innovative formulation contains a blend of three active ingredients :Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG form. The study assessed the effectiveness of this combination against Plant hoppers (BPH & WBPH) in Rice crop, comparing it to market-standard products used individually, in combination, or untreated controls.
Notably, the Novel Trimix-Insecticide Combination/Formulation (T-7 to T-9) exhibited remarkable results when applied at a 15-day interval. This regimen yielded the highest percentage of insect control following the 1st and 2nd applications, surpassing the performance of market-standard products used alone (T-2 to T-4). Additionally, even a lower dosage of the Novel Trimix-Insecticide Combination (T-6) demonstrated superior efficacy compared to individual market-standard products and untreated controls, all without causing any adverse effects on the Rice crop.
The success of the Novel Trimix-Insecticide Combination can be attributed to potential synergies among the three distinct active molecules in the formulation. This synergistic effect, combined with the specific ratio and composition/formulation of the ingredients, likely contributed to the observed efficacy against Rice Plant hoppers (BPH & WBPH). The results suggest that the combination's unique formulation led to enhanced insect control without harming the Rice crop.
Interestingly, combining the products of the three market-standard treatments (T-5) as a tank mix also demonstrated good insect control effects. However, this approach resulted in significant phytotoxicity, causing leaf injuries, surface tip damage, and necrosis in the Rice plants. This adverse outcome might be attributed to the potential antagonistic interactions between the various compositions/formulations and ratios of the individual market-standard products, as well as the high concentration of active ingredients in the tank mix.

Protocol-B: Treatment details: (Code: JU (3) PI-102025)
Sr. No. Treatment details Dose (g a.i./ha) Dose (Formulation/ha)
T-1 Untreated - -
T-2 Dinotefuran 20% SG 40 200 gm
T-3 Thiamethoxam 25% WG 25 100 gm
T-4 Pymetrozine50% WDG 150 300 gm
T-5 Dinotefuran 20% SG+ Thiamethoxam 25% WG+ Pymetrozine 50% WDG 40 + 25 + 150 600 gm
T-6 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine25% WDG 28.00 + 56.00 + 70.00 280 gm
T-7 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine25% WDG 35.00 + 70.00 + 87.50 350 gm
T-8 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine25% WDG 42.00 + 84.00 + 105.00 420 gm
T-9 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine25% WDG 49.00 + 98.00 + 122.50 490 gm

Table-8: Plant hoppers (BPH & WBPH) control 15 days after first application (Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20% + Pymetrozine25% WDG)
(Code: JU (3) PI-102025)
Sr. No. Treatment details Dose
g (a.i./ha) Dose (Formulation/ha) Control Observed (%) Control Expected (%) Colby’s Ratio Synergism (Y/N)
T-1 Untreated - - 0.00
T-2 Dinotefuran 20% SG 40 200 gm 35.69
T-3 Thiamethoxam 25% WG 25 100 gm 25.61
T-4 Pymetrozine50% WDG 150 300 gm 38.42
T-5 Dinotefuran 20% SG+ Thiamethoxam 25% WG+ Pymetrozine 50% WDG 40 + 25 + 150 600 gm 74.11
T-6 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine25% WDG 28.00 + 56.00 + 70.00 280 gm 64.85 66.23 0.98 N
T-7 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine 25% WDG 35.00 + 70.00 + 87.50 350 gm 67.57 68.16 0.99 N
T-8 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine 25% WDG 42.00 + 84.00 + 105.00 420 gm 67.85 69.06 0.98 N
T-9 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine25% WDG 49.00 + 98.00 + 122.50 490 gm 69.48 71.31 0.97 N

Table-9: Plant hoppers (BPH & WBPH) control 15 days after second application (Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20% + Pymetrozine25% WDG) (Code: JU (3) PI-102025)

Sr. No. Treatment details Dose
g (a.i./ha) Dose (Formulation/ha) Control Observed (%) Control Expected (%) Colby’s Ratio Synergism (Y/N)
T-1 Untreated - - 0.00
T-2 Dinotefuran 20% SG 40 200 gm 36.77
T-3 Thiamethoxam 25% WG 25 100 gm 28.48
T-4 Pymetrozine50% WDG 150 300 gm 39.01
T-5 Dinotefuran 20% SG+ Thiamethoxam 25% WG+ Pymetrozine 50% WDG 40 + 25 + 150 600 gm 89.01
T-6 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine25% WDG 28.00 + 56.00 + 70.00 280 gm 71.97 73.39 0.98 N
T-7 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine25% WDG 35.00 + 70.00 + 87.50 350 gm 75.56 76.19 0.99 N
T-8 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine25% WDG 42.00 + 84.00 + 105.00 420 gm 75.56 76.97 0.98 N
T-9 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine25% WDG 49.00 + 98.00 + 122.50 490 gm 76.46 78.44 0.97 N

Table-10: Phytotoxicity of Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20% + Pymetrozine25% WDGagainst Plant hopper (BPH & WBPH) on Rice (After First Application)
(Code: JU (3) PI-102025)
Sr. No. Treatment details Dose
g (a.i./ha) Dose (Formulation/ha) 1 DAT 3 DAT 5 DAT 7 DAT 10 DAT
T-1 Untreated - - 0 0 0 0 0
T-2 Dinotefuran 20% SG 40 200 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-3 Thiamethoxam 25% WG 25 100 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-4 Pymetrozine50% WDG 150 300 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-5 Dinotefuran 20% SG+ Thiamethoxam 25% WG+ Pymetrozine 50% WDG 40 + 25 + 150 600 gm 1 2 3 4 5
T-6 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine25% WDG 28.00 + 56.00 + 70.00 280 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-7 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine25% WDG 35.00 + 70.00 + 87.50 350 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-8 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine25% WDG 42.00 + 84.00 + 105.00 420 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-9 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine25% WDG 49.00 + 98.00 + 122.50 490 gm 0 0 0 0 0

Table-11: Phytotoxicity of Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20% + Pymetrozine 25% WDGagainst Plant hopper (BPH & WBPH) on Rice (After Second Application)
(Code: JU (3) PI-102025)
Sr. No. Treatment details Dose
g (a.i./ha) Dose (Formulation/ha) 1 DAT 3 DAT 5 DAT 7 DAT 10 DAT
T-1 Untreated - - 0 0 0 0 0
T-2 Dinotefuran 20% SG 40 200 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-3 Thiamethoxam 25% WG 25 100 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-4 Pymetrozine50% WDG 150 300 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-5 Dinotefuran 20% SG+ Thiamethoxam 25% WG+ Pymetrozine 50% WDG 40 + 25 + 150 600 gm 1 2 3 4 5
T-6 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine25% WDG 28.00 + 56.00 + 70.00 280 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-7 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine25% WDG 35.00 + 70.00 + 87.50 350 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-8 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine25% WDG 42.00 + 84.00 + 105.00 420 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-9 Dinotefuran 10% + Thiamethoxam 20 + Pymetrozine25% WDG 49.00 + 98.00 + 122.50 490 gm 0 0 0 0 0

Table 8 and 9 (Protocol-B):
Results from Table 8 and 9: The results from these tables show that the Trimix-Insecticidal Combination [coded as JU (3) PI-102025] demonstrated good control of Plant hoppers (BPH & WBPH) in Rice crop after the first and second applications, with a 15-day interval between applications. The combination performed better than the market-standard products applied alone and the untreated control.
Phytotoxic Effects: The Trimix-Insecticidal Combination did not cause any phytotoxic effects on the Rice crop, indicating that it didn't harm the plants' growth or health.
Comparison to Protocol-A: While the Trimix-Insecticidal Combination was effective, it was found to be inferior in comparison to Protocol-A for controlling Plant hoppers (BPH & WBPH) in Rice crop. Protocol-A was another approach used in the experiment, which yielded better results.
In summary, the study suggests that the Trimix-Insecticidal Combination [JU (3) PI-102025] was effective in controlling Plant hoppers (BPH & WBPH) in Rice crop when applied at a 15-day interval after the 1st and 2nd applications. However, it was not as effective as Protocol-A.

Protocol-C: Treatment details: (Code: JU (3) PI-152535)

Sr. No. Treatment details Dose (g a.i./ha) Dose (Formulation/ha)
T-1 Untreated - -
T-2 Dinotefuran 20% SG 40 200 gm
T-3 Thiamethoxam 25% WG 25 100 gm
T-4 Pymetrozine50% WDG 150 300 gm
T-5 Dinotefuran 20% SG+ Thiamethoxam 25% WG+ Pymetrozine 50% WDG 40 + 25 + 150 600 gm
T-6 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 42.00 + 70.00 + 98.00 280 gm
T-7 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 52.50 + 87.50 + 122.50 350 gm
T-8 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 63.00 + 105.00 + 147.00 420 gm
T-9 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 73.50 + 122.50 + 171.50 490 gm

Table-12: Plant hoppers (BPH & WBPH) control 15 days after first application (Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25% + Pymetrozine35% WDG)
(Code: JU (3) PI-152535)
Sr. No. Treatment details Dose
g (a.i./ha) Dose (Formulation/ha) Control Observed (%) Control Expected (%) Colby’s Ratio Synergism (Y/N)
T-1 Untreated - - 0.00
T-2 Dinotefuran 20% SG 40 200 gm 34.99
T-3 Thiamethoxam 25% WG 25 100 gm 24.79
T-4 Pymetrozine50% WDG 150 300 gm 37.74
T-5 Dinotefuran 20% SG+ Thiamethoxam 25% WG+ Pymetrozine 50% WDG 40 + 25 + 150 600 gm 75.48
T-6 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 42.00 + 70.00 + 98.00 280 gm 73.83 74.74 0.99 N
T-7 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 52.50 + 87.50 + 122.50 350 gm 75.48 75.92 0.99 N
T-8 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 63.00 + 105.00 + 147.00 420 gm 75.48 77.42 0.97 N
T-9 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 73.50 + 122.50 + 171.50 490 gm 76.03 79.25 0.96 N

Table-13: Plant hoppers (BPH & WBPH) control 15 days after second application (Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25% + Pymetrozine35% WDG) (Code: JU (3) PI-152535)

Sr. No. Treatment details Dose
g (a.i./ha) Dose (Formulation/ha) Control Observed (%) Control Expected (%) Colby’s Ratio Synergism (Y/N)
T-1 Untreated - - 0.00
T-2 Dinotefuran 20% SG 40 200 gm 38.85
T-3 Thiamethoxam 25% WG 25 100 gm 30.46
T-4 Pymetrozine50% WDG 150 300 gm 40.18
T-5 Dinotefuran 20% SG+ Thiamethoxam 25% WG+ Pymetrozine 50% WDG 40 + 25 + 150 600 gm 90.51
T-6 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 42.00 + 70.00 + 98.00 280 gm 89.85 90.30 0.99 N
T-7 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 52.50 + 87.50 + 122.50 350 gm 90.51 91.15 0.99 N
T-8 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 63.00 + 105.00 + 147.00 420 gm 90.73 92.25 0.98 N
T-9 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 73.50 + 122.50 + 171.50 490 gm 91.39 92.88 0.98 N

Table-14: Phytotoxicity of Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25% + Pymetrozine35% WDG against Plant hopper (BPH & WBPH) on Rice (After First Application)
(Code: JU (3) PI-152535)
Sr. No. Treatment details Doseg (a.i./ha) Dose (Formulation/ha) 1 DAT 3 DAT 5 DAT 7 DAT 10 DAT
T-1 Untreated - - 0 0 0 0 0
T-2 Dinotefuran 20% SG 40 200 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-3 Thiamethoxam 25% WG 25 100 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-4 Pymetrozine50% WDG 150 300 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-5 Dinotefuran 20% SG+ Thiamethoxam 25% WG+ Pymetrozine 50% WDG 40 + 25 + 150 600 gm 1 2 3 4 5
T-6 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 42.00 + 70.00 + 98.00 280 gm 1 2 3 3 3
T-7 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 52.50 + 87.50 + 122.50 350 gm 1 2 3 3 3
T-8 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 63.00 + 105.00 + 147.00 420 gm 1 2 3 3 3
T-9 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 73.50 + 122.50 + 171.50 490 gm 1 2 3 4 4

Table-16: Phytotoxicity of Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25% + Pymetrozine35% WDG against Plant hopper (BPH & WBPH) on Rice (After Second Application)
(Code: JU (3) PI-152535)
Sr. No. Treatment details Doseg (a.i./ha) Dose (Formulation/ha) 1 DAT 3 DAT 5 DAT 7 DAT 10 DAT
T-1 Untreated - - 0 0 0 0 0
T-2 Dinotefuran 20% SG 40 200 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-3 Thiamethoxam 25% WG 25 100 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-4 Pymetrozine50% WDG 150 300 gm 0 0 0 0 0
T-5 Dinotefuran 20% SG+ Thiamethoxam 25% WG+ Pymetrozine 50% WDG 40 + 25 + 150 600 gm 1 2 3 4 5
T-6 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 42.00 + 70.00 + 98.00 280 gm 1 2 3 3 3
T-7 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 52.50 + 87.50 + 122.50 350 gm 1 2 3 3 3
T-8 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 63.00 + 105.00 + 147.00 420 gm 1 2 3 3 3
T-9 Dinotefuran 15% + Thiamethoxam 25 + Pymetrozine 35% WDG 73.50 + 122.50 + 171.50 490 gm 1 2 3 4 4

Table 12 and 13 (Protocol-C):

Results from Table 12 and 13 The results from these tables show that the Trimix-Insecticidal Combination [coded as JU (3) PI-152535]also provided good control of Plant hoppers (BPH & WBPH) in Rice crop after the first and second applications, with a 15-day interval between applications. The combination performed better than the market-standard products applied alone and the untreated control.

Phytotoxic Effects: However, there were significant phytotoxic effects observed as a result of using the Trimix-Insecticidal Combination. These effects included leaf injuries, surface tip damage, and necrosis in the Rice plants.

The phytotoxicity may be attributed to the high concentration of active ingredients present in the tank mix of the combination.

Comparison to Protocol-A: However, despite its effectiveness, the combination was not considered economically feasible. Additionally, the Trimix-Insecticidal Combination was associated with a higher level of phytotoxic effects on Rice plants. So, due to the negative impacts on the Rice crop and the associated economic concerns make it less preferable as a treatment option in comparison to Protocol-A.

Summary and Conclusion:

Evaluation of bio-efficacy of Plant hoppers (BPH & WBPH) of Rice crop:
Results shown in Table 3 and 4 of Protocol-A indicated that recently invented Novel Trimix-Insecticide Combination/Formulation[Coded as JU (3) PI-122230] that comprises of “Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG” (T-7 to T-9), when applied at 15 days interval,surprisingly provided maximum percent and longer duration control of Plant hoppers (BPH & WBPH) of Rice crop after 1st and 2nd applications in comparison tothe products of market-standard applied alone (T-2 to T-4) followed by lower dose (T-6) and untreated control (T-1), without causing any phytotoxic effect on Rice crop.

It might be the result of positive synergy and unique ratio/composition/formulation of all three different molecules when tested at different dosages.

Simultaneously, when combination ofthe products of all three market-standard (T-5) applied together as tank-mixed also provided good control of Plant hoppers (BPH & WBPH), but caused high phytotoxic effect in terms of leaf injury on tip/surface and necrosison Rice crop. It might be the result of antagonistic effect of different composition/formulation of individual product contained in different ratio as well as high concentration of active ingredients.

Overall, Treatment-7 of Protocol-A, the disclosed Novel Trimix-Insecticidal Synergistic Combination/Formulation of “Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG”@ 350gm/ha (42.00 + 78.75 + 105.00 g a.i./ha) followed by T-8 and T-9, without causing any phytotoxic effect on Rice crop was observed most suitable, effective and economical for the control of Rice Plant hoppers (BPH & WBPH) in comparison to other tested combinations.

Comparison in between Protocol-A, Protocol-B and Protocol-C: In summary, among the tested combinations/Formulations, Treatment-7 (Novel Trimix-Insecticidal Synergistic Combination) of Protocol-A, showed the most promising and economical outcomes for controlling Rice hoppers (BPH & WBPH). This treatment, applied at a specific dosage, outperformed other combinations in terms of insects control and crop safety. The study underscores the significance of optimizing the balance between active ingredients and their concentrations to achieve optimal insect management while ensuring the well-being of the crop in comparison to Protocol-B and Protocol-C.

Novel Trimix-Insecticide Combination/Formulation [JU (3) PI-122230]:

Composition: “Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG”

Application: Applied at 15-day intervals

Effectiveness: Showed maximum percent and longer duration control of Plant hoppers (BPH & WBPH) of Rice crop after 1st and 2nd applications compared to market-standard products applied alone or in combination.

Phytotoxicity: Did not cause any harmful effects on the Rice crop.

Market-Standard Products:

Comparison: Treatment-7 (Protocol-A) of JU (3) PI-122230 outperformed over individual market-standard products applied alone (T-2 to T-4) and even a lower dose of the same combination (T-6).

Phytotoxicity: The combination of all three market-standard products applied as a tank mix (T-5) showed good insect control but caused phytotoxic effects, including leaf injury and necrosis on the Rice crop.

Best Treatment Option:

Treatment-7 of Protocol-A: Novel Trimix-Insecticidal Combination/Formulation of “Dinotefuran 12% + Thiamethoxam 22.5% + Pymetrozine 30% WDG” @ 350gm/ha, applied at specific dosages of each component.

Effectiveness: Treatment-7 of Protocol-A was observed as the most suitable, effective, and economical option for controlling Plant hoppers (BPH & WBPH) without causing any phytotoxic effects on the Rice crop.

Success of the Novel Trimix-Insecticide Combination/Formulation: The success of the novel combination/formulation [JU (3) PI-122230) is attributed to positive synergy between the different active ingredients and their unique ratio/composition/formulation, which provides superior insect control without harming the crops. In contrast, the market-standard products when applied together as tank-mixed (T-5) might have an antagonistic effect due to their different compositions/formulations and ratios, leading to phytotoxicity at higher concentrations.

Overall, Treatment-7 of Protocol-A was found to be the optimal choice in terms of insect control and crop safety.
Phytotoxicity: Results shown in Table 7 and 8 of Protocol-A indicated that the success of the Novel Trimix-Insecticide Combination can be attributed to potential positive synergies among the three distinct active molecules in the formulation. This synergistic effect, combined with the specific ratio and composition/formulation of the ingredients, likely contributed to the observed efficacy against Rice Plant hopper (BPH & WBPH). The results suggest that the combination's unique formulation led to enhanced insect control without harming the Rice crop.
Interestingly, combining the products of the three market-standard treatments (T-5) as a tank mix also demonstrated good insect control effects. However, this approach resulted in significant phytotoxicity, causing leaf injuries, surface tip damage, and necrosis in the Rice plants. This adverse outcome might be attributed to the potential antagonistic interactions between the various compositions/formulations and ratios of the individual market-standard products, as well as the high concentration of active ingredients in the tank mix. ,CLAIMS:
1. An insecticidal composition comprising:
a) Dinotefuron in an amount ranging from 05 - 30% w/w,
b) Pymetrozine in an amount ranging from 10- 40% w/w; and
c) Thaimethoxam in an amount ranging from 10 to 35%w/w.
2. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein Dinotefuron is present in an amount of 12% w/w,Pymetrozine is present in an amount of 30% w/w and Thiamethoxam is present in an amount of 22.5 % w/w.
3. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 1, comprising at least one agriculturally acceptable excipient.
4. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein said insecticidal composition is formulated in a form selected from the group consisting of water-soluble concentrates (SL), emulsifiable concentrates (EC), emulsions (EW), micro-emulsions (ME), Suspension concentrates (SC), oil-based suspension concentrates (OD), flowable suspensions (FS), water-dispersible granules (WDG), water-soluble granules (SG), wettable powders (WP), water soluble powders (SP), dry flowables (DF), granules (GR), encapsulated granules (CG), fine granules (FG), macrogranules (GG), aqueous Suspo-emulsions (SE), capsule suspensions (CS), and microgranules (MG).
5. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 4, wherein said insecticidal composition is formulated in the form of a Wettable dispersible granules (WDG).
6. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 5, comprising at least a wetting agent; at least a dispersing agent; at least disintegrating agent and at least antifoaming agent.
7. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 6, wherein said wetting agents are selected form alkyl phenol ethoxylate, fatty oil ethoxylate, phenyl naphthalene sulphonates, alkyl naphthalene sulfonates, sodium alkyl naphthalene sulfonate, sodium salt of sulfonated alkyl carboxylate, dioctyl sulfosuccinate sodium salt, polyoxyalkylated ethyl phenols, polyoxyethoxylated fatty alcohols, polyoxyethoxylated fatty amines, lignin derivatives, alkane sulfonates, alpha olefin sulfonates, alkylbenzene sulfonates, salts of polycarboxylic acids, salts of esters of sulfosuccinic acid, octyl phenol ether sulphate, anionic phosphate esters, disodium laureth sulfosuccinate, diisodecyl sodium sulfosuccinate, alkylnaphthalenesulfonates, alkylbenzenesulfonates, alkylpolyglycol ether sulfonates, alkyl ether phosphates, alkyl ether sulfates and alkyl sulfosuccinic monoesters, and mixtures thereof. .
8. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 6, wherein said dispersing agent is selected from lignosulphonates, phenyl naphthalene sulphonates, condensed methyl naphthalene sulfonate, polyaromatic sulfonates, sodium alkyl aryl sulfonates, maleic anhydride copolymers, phosphate esters, condensation products of aryl/alkyl sulphonic acids and formaldehyde, addition products of ethylene oxide and fatty acid esters, polycarboxylates alkali earth metal salt of alkylbenzene sulfonate, calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate, salts of sulfonated naphthalene, polystyrenated acrylated co- polymer, salts of polyacrylic acids, salts of phenol sulfonic acids, and mixtures thereof.
9. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 7, wherein said antifoaming agent is selected from silicone compounds such as dimethyl polysiloxane emulsion, silicon and organic fluorine compounds.
10. A method for controlling insects in rice, said method comprising treating rice crop with an insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 1.
11. A process for preparing an insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 1 as wettable dispersible granules formulation, said process comprising:
(a) Weighed required quantity of china clay into the premixing blender then add Sodium ligno sulphonate and Sodium lauryl sulphate and mixed it for half an hour .
(b) The above homogenous mixed mass and anhydrous citric acid were mixed for another half an hour
(c) Mixed the Pymetrozine and Dinotefuron one by one into blender and adds Thiamethoxam to it, and again mixed it for 1 hour.
(d) After mixing 1 hr material take to milling with ACM/Jet mill to get desirable particle size (=15µm).
(e) After milling, material shifted to post blender followed by dough mixing with water (10-15%).
(f) Now dough is subjected to granulation with basket extruder.
(g) Granules dried through FBD @60°C for 30 min.