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 Emamectin benzoate, Bifenthrin and Cartap Hydrochloride. The present invention further relates to the process of preparation of said composition and uses thereof.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The background description includes information that may be useful in understanding the present invention. It is not an admission that any of the information provided herein is prior art or relevant to the presently claimed invention, or that any publication specifically or implicitly referenced is prior art.
Enhancement of agricultural produce requires the protection of the crops and its produce from pest damage. Various chemicals and their formulations have been developed and are in use currently for the effective management of insects and pests. Due to non-judicious use of the hitherto known pesticides, the pests gain resistance and become hard to kill. Physically compatible pesticide mixtures exhibit a better pest management. These mixtures show multifaceted advantages than when applied individually, providing a synergistic effect.
The need for more food has to be met through higher yields per unit of land, water, energy and time. Excessive use of mineral fertilizers and chemical pesticides has caused soil degradation, ground water pollution and the spread of the pest's resistant to pesticides in several areas. Hence their judicious use includes avoiding prophylactic sprays, adopting strip treatment, spot application to only those areas with heavy incidence of pests, application to the soil to avoid direct contact with the natural enemies and using selective or non-persistent pesticides. The systemic pesticides are sprayed at a concentration of 0.02 to 0.05 percent active ingredient. The contact pesticides are sprayed at 0.05 to 0.07 or even 0.1 percent active ingredient. The soil application of the granular systemic insecticides varies from 1 to 2 kg a.i./ha. The fungicides are applied up to 2 g/l depending upon the chemical used, pest species and season of the application.
Processes for insecticidal agents and compositions have been developed to control insect pests and in practice have been used as a single or a mixed agent. However, processes for the economically efficient and ecologically safe insect control compositions are still being sought. A process for the preparation of insecticidal compositions which allows for reduced effective dosage rates, increased environmental safety and lower incidence of insect resistance are highly desirable. Although the rotational application of insect control agents having different modes of action may be adopted for good pest management practice, this approach does not necessarily give satisfactory insect control. Further, even though combinations of insect control agents have been studied, a high synergistic action has not always been found. Obtaining an insecticidal composition which demonstrates no cross-resistance to existing insecticidal agents, no toxicity problems and little negative impact on the environment is extremely difficult.
Thus there is a need to develop and improve insecticidal compositions to increase agricultural yield. The composition should have high synergistic action, no cross resistance to existing insecticidal agents, avoid excess loading of the toxicant to the environment and negligible impact to environmental safety. A need also exists for synergistic insecticidal compositions which could be physico- compatible formulations in the form of storage stable, safely packed, ready to use formulation.
OBJECTS OF THE INVENTION
It is an object of the present invention to provide a novel, stable, synergistic, insecticidal composition comprising Emamectin benzoate, Bifenthrin and Cartap Hydrochloride as its ingredients.
It is another object of the present invention to provide an insecticidal composition comprising Emamectin benzoate and Bifenthrin as insecticidal active ingredients and Cartap Hydrochloride 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.
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 Emamectin benzoate as the first active ingredient, Bifenthrin as the second active ingredient and Cartap Hydrochloride 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 Whorl Maggot, Stem borer and Leaf folder 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 wettable powder.
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.

DEFINITIONS
The terms “a” and “an” herein do not denote a limitation of quantity, but rather denote the presence of at least one of the referenced item.
The term "Insecticidal" as used herein, refers to the ability of a substance to increase mortality or inhibit, growth rate of insects
The terms “plants” and “vegetation” include, but are not limited to,germinant seeds, emerging seedlings, plants emerging from vegetative propagules, and established vegetation.
As used herein, the terms "comprises", "comprising", "includes", "including", or any other variation thereof, are intended to cover a non-exclusive inclusion, subject to any limitation explicitly indicated. For example, a composition or a method that comprises a list of elements is not necessarily limited to only those elements but may include other elements not expressly listed or inherent to such composition, or method.
As used herein, the term "agrochemically acceptable salts" are typically acid addition salts of inorganic or organic acids, preferably of hydrochloric acid, hydrobromic acid, sulfuric acid, nitric acid, perchloric acid, phosphoric acid, formic acid, acetic acid, trifluoroacetic acid, oxalic acid, malonic acid, toluenesulfonic acid or benzoic acid.
As used herein, the term “additive(s)” or "auxiliary agent(s)" or “agriculturally acceptable carrier(s)”can be used interchangeably and refers to inert substances which are commonly used as diluent, to provide stability or to increase the activity profile of the composition or formulation with or without having agrochemical activity.
Unless otherwise specified, % refers to % weight; and % weight refers to % of the weight of the respective component with respect to the total weight of the composition.
As used herein, the term “lower” or “minimal” or “minimum” can be used interchangeably and refers to the optimum concentration of active or inactive ingredients of formulation to achieve the expected efficacy.
In one embodiment, the present invention relates to a composition of Emamectin benzoate, Bifenthrin, Cartap Hydrochloride comprising organic or inorganic carrier material, including agriculturally acceptable additive(s) selected from the group comprising of solid carrier(s), surfactant(s), binder(s), disintegrating agent(s), wetting agent(s), pH adjuster(s), thickener(s), filler(s), diluent(s), anti-caking agent(s), defoaming agent(s), buffering agent(s), Adsorbents and/or coloring agent(s) or combination thereof. The composition may also contain if desired, one or more auxiliaries customary for crop protection compositions.
Emamectin benzoate chemically known as (4R)-4-deoxy-4-(methylamino)avermectin B1 benzoate (1:1) is an avermectin insecticide. It is a contact insecticide with negligible toxicity to non-target organisms. It allosterically activates glutamate-gated chloride channels (GluCls) causing paralysis in the insects.

Bifenthrin chemical name is: 2-methyl-3-phenylbenzyl 2, 2-dimethyl-3- (2-chloro-3, 3, 3-trifluoro-1-propenyl) cyclopropanecarboxylate is a high-efficiency synthetic pyrethrin insecticide and acaricide, mainly has the effects of contact poisoning and stomach poisoning, has no systemic and fumigation effects, has wide insecticidal spectrum, quick action and long residual effect period, does not move in soil, and is relatively safe to the environment. It can be used for preventing and treating bollworm, cotton red spider, peach fruit borer, etc.

Cartap Hydrochloride chemical name: 1, 3-bis- (carbamoylthio) -2-dimethylaminopropane. It is a derivative of nereistoxin, has broad spectrum, and can be used for preventing and treating various pests and nematodes of Lepidoptera, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, Diptera, etc. Has little influence on predatory mites. The toxicological mechanism is to block the transmission impulse of nerve cell junction in central nervous system, so as to paralyze insects.

The present invention thus provides an insecticidal composition comprising a) Emamectin Benzoate as the first active ingredient b) Bifenthrin as the second active ingredient and c) Cartap Hydrochloride as the third active ingredients. Wherein, Emamectin Benzoate is present in an amount ranging from 0.5-15% w/w, Bifenthrin is present in an amount ranging from 0.5-15% w/w and Cartap Hydrochloride is present in an amount ranging from 15 to 50% w/w the insecticidal composition.

In a preferred embodiment, Emamectin Benzoate is present in an amount 2.90%w/w, Bifenthrin is present in an amount of 3.30%w/w and Cartap Hydrochloride is present in an amount of 29.20%w/w of the insecticidal composition.

The lists of crops which can be protected by the insecticidal composition of the present invention are GMO (Genetically Modified Organism) and Non GMO varieties of Cotton (Gossypium spp.), Paddy (Oryza sativa), Wheat (Triticum aestavum), Barley (Hordeum vulgare), Maize (Zea mays), Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor), Pearl millet (Pennisetumglaucum), Sugarcane (Saccharum officinamm), Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris), Soybean (Glycin max), Peanut (Arachis hypogaea), Sunflower (Helianthus annuus) , Mustard (Brassica juncea), Rape seed (Brassica napus), Linseed (Linumusitatissimum), Sesame (Sesamum indicum), Green gram (Vigna radiata), Black gram (Vigna mungo), Chickpea (Ciceraritinum), Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata), Redgram (Cajanuscajan), Frenchbean (Phaseolus vulgaris), Indian bean (Lablab purpureus), Horse gram (Macrotylomauniflorum), Field pea (Pisum sativum), Cluster bean (Cyamopsistetragonoloba), Lentils (Lens culinaris), Brinjal (Solanum melongena), Cabbage (Brassica oleracea var. capitata), Cauliflower (Brassica oleracea var. botrytis), Okra (Abelmoschus esculentus) , Onion (Allium cepa L.), Tomato (Solanum lycopersicun) , Potato (Solanum tuberosum) , Sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas), Chilly (Capsicum annum), Garlic (Allium sativum), Cucumber (Cucumis sativus), Muskmelons (Cucumis melo), Watermelon (Citmlluslanatus), Bottle gourd (Lagenariasiceraria), Bitter gourd (Momordica charantia), Radish (Raphanus sativus), Carrot (Dacuscarota subsp. sativus), Turnip (Brassica rapasubsprapa), Apple (Melus domestica), Banana (Musa spp.), Citrus groups (Citrus spp.), Grape (Vitis vinifera), Guava (Psidium guajava), Litchi (Litchi chinensis), Mango (Mangiferaindica), Papaya (Carica papaya), Pineapple (Ananascomosus), Pomegranate (Punicagranatum) , Sapota (Manilkarazapota), Tea (Camellia sinensis), Coffea (Coffea Arabica), Turmeric (Curcuma longa), Ginger (Zingiberofficinale), Cumin (Cuminumcyminum), Fenugreek (Trigonellafoenum-graecum), Fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), Coriander (Coriandrum sativum), Ajwain (Trachyspermumammi), Psyllium (Plantago ovate), Black Pepper (Piper nigrum), Stevia (Stevia rebaudiana), Safed musli (Chlorophytum tuberosum),Drum stick (Moringa oleifera), Coconut (Coco nucifera), Mentha ( Mentha spp.), Rose (Rosa spp.), Jasmine (Jasminum spp.), Marigold ( Tagetes spp.), Common daisy (Beilis perennis), Dahlia (Dahlia hortnesis), Gerbera ( Gerbera jamesonii), Carnation (Dianthus caryophyllus).

The insecticidal composition of the present invention can be used to control the Insects from the order of the Lepidoptera, for example cutworm Agrotisypsilon, sugarcane shoot borer Chile infuscatellus, sugarcane stalk borer Chile partellus, sugarcane internode borer Chilosacchariphagus, paddy/rice stem borer, Leaf Folder Whorl Maggot Chile suppressalis, rice leaffolder Cnaphalocrocismedinalis, apple colding moth Cydiapomonella, okra fruit borer Eariasvittella, Eariasinsulana, Tomato fruit borer tobacco cater pillar leaf miner Helicoverpaarmigera, tobacco budworm Helicoverpavirescens, corn earworm Helicoverpazea, cabbage webworm Hellulaundalis, Brinjal fruit and shoot borer Eeucinodesorbonalis, bean pod borer Marucavitrata, Marucatestulalis, armyworm Mythimnaseparata, cotton pinkbollworm Pectinophoragossypiella, citrus leafminer Phyllocnistiscitrella, cabbage butterfly Pieris bras-sicae, diamond backmoth Plutellaxylostella, paddy stem borer Scirpophagaexcerptallis, Scirpophagaincertulas, Scirpophagainnotata, wheat stem borer Sesamiainferens, Sitotrogacerealella, Spilosomaobliqua, Spodopterafrugiperda, Spodopteralittoralis, Spodopteralitura, Trichoplusiani, Tryporyza novella, Tutaabsoluta Beetles (Coleoptera), for example Anthonomusgrandis, Bruchuslentis, Diabroticasemipunctata, Diabroticavirgifera, Dicladispaarmigera, Epila-chnavarivestis, Holotrichia bicolor, Holotrichiaconsanguinea, Holotrichia serrata, Leptinotarsadecemlineata, Phyllotretachrysocephala, Popillia japonica.

The insecticidal composition of the present invention can be applied to any and all developmental stages of pests, such as egg, nymph, larva, pupa and adult. The pests may be controlled by contacting the target pest, its food supply, habitat, breeding ground or its locus with a pesticidally effective amount of the inventive mixtures or of compositions comprising the mixtures.
In a more preferred embodiment, the insecticidal composition of the present invention is formulated in the form of a wettable powder comprising a Surfactants,Dispersing agent Wetting agent, Adsorbent, and carriers.

Surfactant(s) (a dispersing agent, a wetting agent, a spreader, an adjuvant for penetrationenhancement, rain fastness, soil leaching control etc.) are nonionic or anionic surfactants or a combination of these surfactants. It is preferred to use one or more than one kind of surfactant.
Surfactant(s) is selected from the group comprising of, but not limited to, sugar esters such as sorbitan monolaurate, polyoxyethylenesorbitan monolaurate; C1-C30 alkyl carboxylate, C1-C20 hydroxyalkylcarboxylate, polymer containing carboxylate, arylcarboxylate, alkylx (e.g. aliphatic diand tricarboxylates) having 2 to 32 carbon atoms, such as aconitic acid, adipic acid, aspartic acid, citric acid, fumaric acid, galactaric acid, glutamic acid, glutaric acid, oxoglutaric acid, maleic acid,malic acid, malonic acid, oxalate, sebacic acid, succinic acid, tartaric acid; alkyl polyglucoside such as decyl glucoside; polyoxyethylene alkyl ethers such as polyoxyethylene lauryl ether, or polyoxyethylene coconut fatty alcohol ether; polyoxyethylene alkynyl ether such as polyoxyethylene 2,4,7,9-tetramethyl-5-decyn-4,7-diol ether; polyoxyethylene aryl ethers such as polyoxyethylenenonylphenyl ether or polyoxyethylenetristyrylphenyl ether; polyoxyethylene vegetable oil ethers such as polyoxyethylene castor oil or polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil; vegetable oil ethoxylate; C6-C20 linear and branched alcohol ethoxylates, C6-C20 alcohol 5 propoxylates, C6-C20 propoxylated and ethoxylated alcohols; polyoxyethylene fatty acid esters such as polyoxyethylene monolaurate, polyoxyethylene distearate or polyoxyethylene resin acid ester; polyoxyethylene polyoxypropylene (EO-PO) block co-polymers such as Pluronic®; polyoxyethylene polyoxypropylene alkyl ether such as polyoxyethylene polyoxypropylene lauryl ether; polyoxyethylene polyoxypropylene aryl ether such as polyoxyethylene polyoxypropylene styrylphenyl ether; polyoxyethylene alkyl amines such as polyoxyethylene stearyl amine; polyoxyethylene fatty acid amide such as lauric acid diethanolamid; fluorinated surfactant; alkyl sulfates such as sodium lauryl sulfate; sodium alkylbenzene sulfonate, calcium alkylbenzene sulphonate; polyoxyethylene alkyl ether sulfates such as sodium polyoxyethylene lauryl ether sulfate; polyoxyethylene aryl ether sulfates such as sodium polyoxyethylene nonylphenyl ether sulfate or ammonium polyoxyethylene tristyrylphenyl ethersulfate; aryl sulfonate such as calcium benzene sulfonate calcium dodecyl benzene sulfonate, sodium naphthalene sulfonate, sodium salt of naphthalene sulfonate condensate (MORWET® D-425) or sodium naphthalene sulfonate formaldehyde condensate; poly aryl phenyl ether sulphate ammonium salt; ‘alpha’-olefin sulfonate; lauryl sulfosuccinate, laureth sulfosuccinate, laureth-5 sulfosuccinate, ricinoleamide MEA sulfosuccinate, undecylenearnide MEA sulfosuccinate, diisobutyl sulfosuccinate, dioctyl sulfosuccinate, dihexyl sulfosuccinate, dicyclohexyl sulfosuccinate, diisodecyl sulfosuccinate, diisotridecyl sulfosuccinate, di-2-ethylhexyl sulfosuccinate, di-2-methylamyl sulfosuccinate, dimethylamyl sulfosuccinate, dibutylhexyl sulfosuccinate, diisooctyl sulfosuccinate or their alkali metal salts, sodium lignosulfonate; polycarboxylic acid sodium salt; N-methyl fatty acid sarcosinate; polyoxyethylene alkyl ether phosphate; polyoxyethylene aryl ether phosphates such as polyoxyethylene phenyl ether phosphate; polyoxyethylene alkyl phenyl ether phosphate; graft copolymers such as polymethyl methacrylate-polyethylene glycol graft copolymer; Polymericsurfactants such as Polymethyl Methacrylate - Polyetheylene Glycol Graft Copolymer or Methyl 2- methyl-2-propenoate graft polymer with 2-methyl-2-propenoic acid ester with a-methyl-?-hydroxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) and Copolymer condensate of EO & PO or mixt. Of polyoxyethylene C12-15-alkyl ether and polyoxyethylene/polyoxypropylene glycol 4-butoxybutyl ether). These surfactants may be used alone or in combination thereof. The surfactant is present in an amount of from 2% to 8 % by weight based on a total weight of the composition.

Examples of dispersing/co-dispersing agents include but not limited to methyl methacrylate polymer, sodium lignosulfonates; sodium naphthalene sulphonate formaldehyde condensates; tristyryl phenol ethoxylate phosphate esters, polyarylphenyl ether phosphate, polyalkelene glycol ether, tristyrylphenol phosphate ester, tristyrylphenol ethoxylate amine salt of phosphate, tristyrylphenol phosphate amine salt, tristyrylphenol ethoxylated, tristyryl phenol ethylated, acrylic co-polymer, acrylate copolymer, acrylic copolymer, acrylic copolymer sodium salt, alkyl naphthalene sulfonate formaldehyde condensate, alkyl naphthalene sulfonate, naphthalene sulfonic acid, sodium alkyl naphthalene sulfonate blend, sodium polycarboxylate, sodium polyacrylate, ethoxylated oleyl cetyl alcohol, ethoxylated tristryl phenol sulphate, ethoxylated fatty alcohol, polymeric non-aqueous dispersing agent, polyoxyethyleneisotridecanol, tristyrylphenol ethoxylate phosphate ester, sodium salt condensate with formaldehyde, aliphatic alcohol ethoxylates; alky ethoxylates; EO-PO block copolymers; and graft copolymers, either alone or mixtures thereof. These dispersing may be used alone or in combination thereof. The surfactant is present in an amount of from 2% to10 % by weight based on a total weight of the composition

Examples of wetting/co-wetting agents include but not limited to block copolymer, alkoxylated alcohol, ethoxylated propoxylated alcohol, polyalkoxylated butyl ether, sodium alkyl sulphate, sodium lauryl sulphate, sodium alkyl benzene sulfonate, dioctyl sulfosuccinate, polyoxyethylene sorbitol hexaoleate, polyoxyethylenesorbitan monolaurate, polyoxyethylenepolyoxypropylenesorbitan monolaurate, polyoxyethylene lauryl ether, tristyrylphenol ethoxylated, alkoxyleted 5 alcohol, alkyl naphthalene sulfonate formaldehyde condensate, block copolymer, sodium dioctyl sulpho succinate, alkyl phenol ethoxylates and aliphatic alcohol ethoxylates, either alone or mixtures thereof.These wetting agents may be used alone or in combination thereof. The surfactant is present in an amount of from 1% to 7 % by weight based on a total weight of the composition

Suitable inert carrier(s) for use in the composition include, but not limited to, natural ground minerals, such as kaolin or china clay, alumina, talc, chalk, quartz, attapulgite, montmorillonite, and diatomaceous earth, or synthetic ground minerals, such as highly dispersed silicic acid, aluminium oxide, silicates, N-Methyl-2-pyrrolidone and calcium phosphates and calcium hydrogen phosphates, crushed and fractionated natural minerals, such as calcite, marble, pumice, precipitated silica, sepiolite, bentonite, river sand, zeolites, starch, sand, talc, quartz, dolomite, synthetic granules of inorganic and organic ground materials and mixtures thereof.

Suitable Adsorbents for use in composition include, but not limited to ion exchange resins, non-ionic adsorbing resins, gel filtration chromatography, activated charcoal, alumina and silica gel, Silicon dioxide and mixtures thereof.

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 microgranules (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 powder.
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 Powder (WP).
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 Emamectin Benzoate technical 2.90% m/m

2 Bifenthrin technical 3.30% m/m

3 Cartap Hydrochloride Technical 29.20% m/ m
4 Polyacrylate Copolymer 4.00% m/m
5 Sulfonated kraft lignin 5.00% m/m
6 Naphthalenesulfonic acid, methyl-, polymer with formaldehyde, sodium salt 3.00% m/m
7 Silicon dioxide 3.00% m/m
8 China clay Q.S.
Preparation method of Wettable Powder.
Step 1: Heat Bifenthrin to 60°C and maintain the temperature for 30 minutes.
Step 2: In the premixing blender, add Silicon Dioxide to coat the Bifenthrin technical material.
Step 3: Mix thoroughly for 30 minutes.
Step 4: Add China Clay, Polyacrylate Copolymer, Sulfonated Kraft Lignin, Naphthalenesulfonic Acid, Methyl-, Polymer with Formaldehyde, Sodium Salt
Step 4: Continue mixing for another 30 minutes.
Step 5: Add Emamectin Benzoate and Cartap Hydrochloride to the blender, one by one.
Step 6: Mix the entire blend for 1 hour.
Step 7: Transfer the mixture to an ACM or Jet Mill for milling to achieve the desired particle size (=15µm).
Step 8: after milling, transfer the material to the post-blender for final blending.

Table-1(b): Quality parameters of WP formulation
S.no.
Parameters
Desired Quality

1 Description/ physical appearance
Material shall be in the form of white to free flowing Powder
2 A.I. content of
Emamectin Benzoate 2.9% w/w (±10%)
Bifenthrin 3.3%w/w (±10%)
Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% w/w (±5%)

3 Suspensibility
shall not be less than 60% w/w.
4 Persistence of foam
shall not be more than 60 ml in 1 min
5 pH of 1% aq. Solution
3.0- 7.0

6 Water content
3% max
7 Acidity/Alkalinity
0.5% Max
8 Heat stability test
Take 100ml sample & keep it in 54°C±2 for 14 days.

Example-2: Field evaluation of the bio-efficacy of the present Insecticidal composition.
Experimental design Randomized Block Design
Replication 3
Treatments 9
Crop Paddy, Oryzasativa Linn.
Plotsize(m2) 5m x5m (25Sq.m.)
Plantingspacing 20cmX15cm
Variety Pusa Basmati-1509

Typeof formulation Wettable Powder (WP)

Stem Borer (Scirpophagaincertulas):
Before spray, a desired concentration of “Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP” was freshly prepared as per each treatment. A desired concentration of insecticide solution was made by mixing the required amount of water. The treatment was imposed upon crossing Economic Threshold Level (ETL).
A pre-treatment observation on the percent dead heart was recorded a day before application. The post treatment observation on dead heart was recorded at 3, 7, 10 and 14 days after respective applications on 10 randomly selected hills per replication. In each replication the number of damaged tillers (dead heart) and total number of tillers was recorded. The percent dead heart will be worked out by using the formula:
Total no. of dead heart per hill
Dead heart (%) = x 100
Total no. of tillers

Likewise, in each treatment, the percent white ear was recorded at dough stage (90-100 days after planting) and percent will be worked out by
Total no. of white ears per hill
White ears (%) = x 100
Total no. of tillers

Further, in each treatment, the percent reduction of dead heart and white ear over untreated control was worked out using modified Abbot’s formula given below.
100X1–(TaXCb)
P=

(TbX Ca)

Where,
P = Percentage reduction over control
Ta = % dead heart/white ear in treatment after spray
Ca = % dead heart/white ear in untreated control after spray
Tb = % dead heart/white ear in treatment before spray
Cb = % dead heart/white ear in untreated control before spray
(Abbott, 1925; Fleming and Ratnakaran, 1985)

Leaf Folder (Cnaphalocrosismedinalis):
To know the efficacy of the test insecticides, a desired concentration of “Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP” was freshly prepared as per each treatment. A desired concentration of insecticide solution was made by mixing the required amount of water. The treatment was imposed upon crossing Economic Threshold Level (ETL). In each treatment, a day before application, the number of freshly damaged leaves/hill was recorded on 10 randomly selected hills per replication. The post-treatment observations on number of freshly damaged leaves were recorded at 3, 7, 10 and 14 days after respective applications and the percent leaf damage will be worked out.
Further, in each treatment, the percent reduction of leaf damage over untreated control was worked out using modified Abbot’s formula given below.
100X1–(TaXCb)
P=

(TbX Ca)

Where,
P = Percentage reduction over control
Ta = Percent leaf damage in treatment after spray
Ca = Percent leaf damage in untreated control after spray
Tb = Percent leaf damage in treatment before spray
Cb = Percent leaf damage in untreated control before spray
Abbott, 1925; Henderson and Tilton, 1955; Fleming and Ratnakaran, 1985)
Whorl Maggot (Hydrelliaspps):
To know the efficacy of the test insecticides, a desired concentration of “Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP” was freshly prepared as per each treatment. A desired concentration of insecticide solution was made by mixing the required amount of water. The treatment was imposed upon crossing Economic Threshold Level (ETL).
To record the incidence, in each replication a quadrant of 1m X 1m was used for taking observation by counting the total number of plants with in quadrant and number of plants affected with whorl maggot and data obtained was analyzed as per the statistical procedures of quadrant analysis at 1 day before application and 3, 7, 10, 14 days after applications.

Number of leaves damaged
Leaf Damage (%) = x 100
Total number of leaves per hill

Further, in each treatment, the percent reduction of leaf damage over untreated control was worked out using modified Abbot’s formula given below.

100X1–(TaXCb)
P=

(TbX Ca)

Where,
P=Percentage reduction over control
Ta=Percent leaf damage in treatment after spray
Ca=Percent leaf damage in untreated control after spray
Tb = Percent leaf damage in treatment before spray
Cb=Percent leaf damage in untreated control before spray

(Abbott,1925;Henderson and Tilton,1955;Flemingand Ratnakaran,1985)
Marketable Yield
The harvesting was done at physiological maturity, the grain yield was recorded treatment wise and the data thus collected were subjected for ANOVA (Gomez and Gomez, 1984; Hosmand, 1988). Further, in each treatment the additional gain in yield over untreated control is calculated as below
Yield in treatment – yield in control
Additional gain yield (%) = x 100
Yield of control

Phytotoxicity:
In each treatment replicated blocks (25m2), the data on crop response was recorded on 1 day before spray, and subsequently on 1, 3, 7, 10 and 14 days after spray on 10 randomly selected hills on leaf tip injury, yellowing, scorching, chlorosis, epinasty, hyponasty and necrosis by following 1-10 scale (0-100%) where 0 means ‘no phytotoxicity’ and 100 means ‘death of plant’.
Phytotoxicity rating scale:

% Injury Rating % Injury Rating
0-10 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

Natural enemies:
In each treatment replicated blocks (25m2), the observations on natural enemies viz. predators, spiders and coccinellid beetles were recorded on 10 randomly selected hills at a day before and 1, 7, 10 and 14 days after application. The data was subjected for ANOVA (Gomez and Gomez, 1984; Hosmand, 1988).

Treatment details:
Table-2: Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP.
Protocol-A: Treatment details: Code: JU (3) PI-020329:

Sr. No.
Treatment details Individual component dosages (g a.i./ha) Combined dosages of all components (g a.i./ha) Formulation dose/ha (ml/gm)
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP
12.69 + 14.44 + 127.75 154.88 437.5
T-2 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP
19.03 + 21.66 + 191.63 232.31 656.25
T-3 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP
25.38 + 28.87 + 255.50 309.75 875
T-4 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP
31.86 + 36.26 + 320.84 388.96 1098.75
T-5 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP
50.75 + 57.75 + 511.00 619.50 1750
T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90% EC (Market standard) - 8.08 425
T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC (Market standard) - 50 500
T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP (Market standard) - 500 1000
T-9 Untreated Check - - -

Table-3: Bio-efficacy of test in secticides against Rice Stem borer in Rice, Kharif 2023-24
Protocol-A: Code: JU (3) PI-020329

Sr.No.
Treatment details
Dosage
(ga.i./ha) Percent Dead Heart Percent Reduction Over UT Check
DBS 3DAS 7DAS 10DAS 14DAS
154.88 10.70 8.61 7.40 5.48 3.53 81.71
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP
232.31 10.73 8.47 7.04 5.01 3.21 83.37
T-2 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP
T-3 309.75 10.06 8.15 5.85 2.79 0.86 95.54
Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP
T-4 388.96 10.59 8.19 4.35 1.77 0.60 96.89
Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP
T-5 619.50 10.23 8.01 4.04 1.66 0.50 97.40
Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP
T-6 8.08 10.82 10.29 9.76 9.27 9.27 51.97
Emamectin Benzoate 01.90 % EC
T-7 50 10.73 9.98 9.46 9.46 9.46 50.98
Bifenthrin 10% EC
T-8
Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP 500 10.81
10.36
9.27
9.37
9.37
51.45
T-9 Untreated Check - 10.15 10.75 13.99 17.14 19.30 -

DBS- Day before spraying; DAS- Days after spraying; UT- Untreated

Table-4: Bio-efficacy of test insecticides against Rice Stem borer in Rice, Kharif 2023-24
Protocol-A: Code: JU (3) PI-020329

Sr. No.
Treatment details
Dosage (ga.i./ha)
Percent White Ear
Percent Reduction Over UT Check
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 154.88 5.05
70.24
T-2 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 232.31 4.54
73.25
T-3 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 309.75 1.56
90.80
T-4 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 388.96 1.30
92.33
T-5 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 619.50 0.92 94.57
T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90 % EC 8.08 8.23 51.50
T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 8.56 49.56
T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP 500 8.80 48.14
T-9 Untreated Check - 16.97 -
DBS-Days before spraying; DAS-Days after spraying; UT- Untreated

Table-5: Bio-efficacy of test insecticides against Rice Leaf folderin Rice, Kharif 2023-24
Protocol-A: Code: JU (3) PI-020329

Sr. No.
Treatment details Dosage (ga.i./ha) Percent Leaf Damage Percent Reduction over UT Check
DBS 3DAS 7DAS 10DAS 14DAS
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 154.88 4.27 3.53 3.19 3.09 2.86 69.96

T-2 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 232.31 4.62 3.35 3.08 3.02 2.79 70.69

T-3 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 309.75 4.54 2.62 1.19 0.52 0.17 98.21

T-4 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 388.96 4.37 2.43 2.10 0.36 0.15 98.42

T-5 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 619.50 4.43 2.37 2.03 0.30 0.10 98.95

T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90 % EC 8.08 4.59 4.25 3.01 3.31 4.47 53.05

T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 4.54 3.87 3.05 3.09 4.06 57.35

T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP 500 4.48 3.82 2.86 2.65 3.47 63.55

T-9 Untreated Check - 4.42 6.26 8.44 8.65 9.52 -

DBS- Day before spraying; DAS- Days after spraying; UT- Untreated
Table-6: Bio-efficacy of test insecticides against Rice Whorl maggot , Kharif 2023-24
Protocol-A: Code: JU (3) PI-020329

Sr. No.
Treatment details Dosage (ga.i./ha) Percent Leaf Damage Percent Reduction over UT Check
DBA 3DAA 7DAA 10DAA 14DAA
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 154.88 7.42 6.82 5.59 4.54 3.82 66.84
T-2 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 232.31 7.59 6.62 5.37 4.31 3.52 69.44
T-3 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 309.75 7.37 5.54 4.54 3.52 2.54 77.95
T-4 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 388.96 7.62 5.43 4.43 3.37 2.43 78.91
T-5 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 619.50 7.43 5.37 4.37 3.33 2.15 81.34
T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90% EC (Market standard) 8.08 7.86 6.43 5.31 4.36 7.43 35.50
T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC (Market standard) 50 7.59 6.59 5.86 4.37 7.86 31.77
T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP (Market standard) 500 7.54 6.27 5.37 4.27 6.54 43.23
T-9 Untreated Check - 7.33 8.54 9.82 10.37 11.52 -
DBA-Days before application; DAA-Days after application; UT- Untreated
Table-7: Bio-efficacy of test insecticides on marketable yield, Kharif 2023
Protocol-A: Code: JU (3) PI-020329

Sr. No.
Treatments Dosage (g a.i./ha) Grain yield (kg/ha) Percent
Increase over control
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 154.88 4137 25.52
T-2 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 232.31 4150 25.91
T-3 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 309.75 4797 45.54
T-4 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 388.96 4807 45.84
T-5 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 619.50 4809 45.90
T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90 % EC 8.08 4040 22.57
T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 3943 19.63
T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP 500 4052 22.94
T-9 Untreated Control - 3296 -

Table-8: Bio-efficacy of test insecticides against natural enemy complex in Rice, Kharif 2023
Protocol-A: Code: JU (3) PI-020329

Sr. No.
Treatments Dosage
(g a.i./ha) Mean No. of spiders/hill Mean No. of coccinellids/hill
1 DBS 7 DAS 10 DAS 14 DAS 1 DBS 7 DAS 10 DAS 14 DAS
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 154.88 1.46 1.24 1.08 0.82 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2
T-2 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 232.31 1.65 1.36 1.24 1.15 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.3
T-3 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 309.75 1.30 1.15 1.26 0.94 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.4
T-4 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 388.96 1.55 1.28 1.34 1.05 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.3
T-5 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 619.50 1.44 1.40 1.15 0.74 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.4
T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90 % EC 8.08 1.64 1.14 1.20 0.65 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.3
T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 1.72 1.38 1.21 0.82 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.4
T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP 500 1.42 1.43 1.21 0.76 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3
T-9 Untreated Control - 1.34 1.28 1.18 1.10 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.4
DBS- Day before spray; DAS- Day after spray

Table-9: Phytotoxicity of test insecticides for Leaf tip injury, Chlorosis, Scorching, Epinasty & Hyponasty in rice, Kharif 2023
Protocol-A: Code: JU (3) PI-020329

Sr. No.
Treatments
Dosage (ga.i./ha) Leaftipinjury/Chlorosis/Scorching/Epinasty or Hyponasty/Necrosis(%)
1DBS 1DAS 3DAS 7DAS 10DAS 14DAS
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 154.88 0 0 0 0 0 0
T-2 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 232.31 0 0 0 0 0 0
T-3 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 309.75 0 0 0 0 0 0
T-4 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 388.96 0 0 0 0 0 0
T-5 Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP 619.50 0 0 0 0 0 0
T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90 % EC 8.08 0 0 0 0 0 0
T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 0 0 0 0 0 0
T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP 500 0 0 0 0 0 0
T-9 UntreatedControl - 0 0 0 0 0 0
DBS: Days before spray; DAS: Days after spray

Results:
Evaluation of bio-efficacy of Rice Stem borer, Leaf folder and Whorl maggot:
The novel trimix insecticide formulation coded as JU (3) PI-020329 in Protocol-A, comprising Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP, showed outstanding efficacy for controlling rice pests. The analysis highlights:
1. Effectiveness and Synergy
• Formulation and Dosage: Treatment-3, applied at 875 g/ha (25.38 + 28.87 + 255.50 g a.i./ha), achieved the most effective pest control results.
• Pests Controlled: The treatment provided long-lasting control over three major pests of rice—Stem borer, Leaf folder, and Whorl maggot.
• Synergy: The combination leverages the distinct modes of action of Emamectin benzoate, Bifenthrin, and Cartap Hydrochloride. This unique ratio appears to have a positive synergistic effect, leading to improved efficacy compared to each component alone.
2. Comparative Performance
• Superior to Market Standards: This trimix treatment (T-3 to T-5) outperformed market-standard insecticides applied individually (T-6 to T-8) as well as lower dosages of the same formulation (T-1 & T-2).
• Untreated Control Comparison: Compared to untreated plots (T-9), Treatment-3 maintained significantly higher levels of pest control, proving its superior protection capabilities.
3. Phytotoxicity and Crop Safety
• No Phytotoxic Effects: Importantly, Treatment-3 showed no phytotoxicity on rice crops, which suggests it is safe for rice at recommended dosages.
• Economics: This treatment was also observed to be economically beneficial, delivering high efficacy at an optimal cost-to-benefit ratio.
Conclusion
The novel Trimix-Insecticidal Synergistic Combination (Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP) at 875 g/ha (25.38 + 28.87 + 255.50 g a.i./ha) is recommended for rice pest management due to its effectiveness in controlling multiple pests, crop safety, and economic advantage.

Protocol-B: Table-10: Treatment details: Code: JU (3) PI-019220

Sr. No.
Treatment details Individual component dosages (g a.i./ha) Combined dosages of all components (g a.i./ha) Formulation dose/ha (ml/gm)
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 8.31 + 10.06 + 88.38 106.75 437.5
T-2 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 12.47 + 15.09 + 132.56 160.13 656.25
T-3 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 16.63 + 20.13 + 176.75 213.50 875
T-4 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 20.88 + 25.27 + 221.95 268.10 1098.75
T-5 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 33.25 + 40.25 + 353.50 427 1750
T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90% EC (Market standard) - 8.08 425
T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC (Market standard) - 50 500
T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP (Market standard) - 500 1000
T-9 Untreated Check - - -

Table-11: Bio-efficacy of test insecticides against Rice Stem borerin Rice, Kharif 2023-24
Protocol-B: Code: JU (3) PI-019220
Sr. No. Treatment details Dosage (ga.i./ha) Percent Dead Heart Percent Reduction Over UT Check
DBS 3DAS 7DAS 10DAS 14DAS
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 106.75 11.70 9.61 8.40 8.48 8.53 55.80
T-2 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 160.13 11.73 8.47 8.04 8.01 8.21 57.46
T-3 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 213.50 11.06 9.15 8.85 7.79 7.86 59.27
T-4 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 268.10 11.59 9.19 8.35 7.77 7.60 60.62
T-5 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 427 11.23 9.01 8.04 7.66 7.50 61.14
T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90 % EC 8.08 11.82 10.29 9.76 9.27 9.27 51.97
T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 11.73 9.98 9.46 9.46 9.46 50.98
T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP 500 11.81 10.36 9.27 9.37 9.37 51.45
T-9 Untreated Check - 11.15 10.75 13.99 17.14 19.30 -
DBS-Days before spraying; DAS-Days after spraying ; UT- Untreated
Table-12: Bio-efficacy of test insecticides against Rice Stem borer in Rice, Kharif 2023-24
Protocol-B: Code: JU (3) PI-019220

Sr. No.
Treatment details
Dosage (ga.i./ha)
Percent White Ear
Percent Reduction Over UT Check
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 106.75
7.53 55.60
T-2 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 160.13 7.21 57.51
T-3 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 213.50
6.86 59.58
T-4 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 268.10 6.60 61.11
T-5 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 427 6.50 61.70
T-6
Emamectin Benzoate 01.90 % EC 8.08 8.23
51.50
T-7
Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 8.56
49.56
T-8
Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP 500 8.80
48.14
T-9
Untreated Check - 16.97
-
DBS-Days before spraying; DAS-Days after spraying; UT- Untreated
Table-13: Bio-efficacy of test insecticides against Rice Leaf folder in Rice , Khari f2023-24
Protocol-B: Code: JU (3) PI-019220.

Sr. No.
Treatment details Dosage (ga.i./ha) Percent Leaf Damage Percent Reduction over UT Check
DBS 3DAS 7DAS 10DAS 14DAS
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 106.75
5.27 4.53 4.19 4.09 4.86 53.80

T-2 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 160.13 5.62 4.35 4.08 4.02 4.79 54.47

T-3 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 213.50
5.54 4.62 4.19 3.52 4.17 60.36

T-4 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 268.10 5.37 4.43 4.10 3.36 4.15 60.55

T-5 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 427 5.43 4.37 4.03 3.30 4.10 61.03

T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90 % EC 8.08 5.59 4.25 4.01 3.31 5.47 48.00

T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 5.54 4.87 4.05 3.09 5.06 51.90

T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP 500 5.48 4.82 4.86 3.65 5.47 48.00

T-9 Untreated Check - 5.42 6.26 8.44 9.65 10.52 -

DBS-Days before spraying; DAS-Days after spraying; UT- Untreated

Table-14:Bio-efficacy of test in secticides against Rice Whorl maggot, Kharif 2023-24
Protocol-B: Code: JU (3) PI-019220

Sr.No.
Treatment details Dosage (ga.i./ha) Percent Leaf Damage Percent Reduction over UT Check
DBA 3DAA 7DAA 10DAA 14DAA
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 106.75 7.86 6.82 5.37 5.37 5.33 52.71
T-2 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 160.13 7.59 6.62 4.54 5.33 5.15 54.30
T-3 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 213.50 7.54 5.54 4.43 4.52 4.43 60.69
T-4 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 268.10 7.33 5.43 4.37 4.36 4.27 62.11
T-5 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 427 7.42 5.37 5.31 4.33 3.94 65.04
T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90% EC (Market standard) 8.08 7.59 6.43 5.86 5.36 7.33 34.96
T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC (Market standard) 50 7.37 6.59 5.37 5.37 7.82 30.61
T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP (Market standard) 500 7.62 6.27 5.37 5.27 6.54 41.97
T-9 Untreated Check - 7.43 8.59 9.86 10.54 11.27 -
DBA-Days before application; DAA-Days after application; UT- Untreated

Table-15: Bio-efficacy of test insecticides against natural enemy complex in Rice, Kharif 2023
Protocol-B: Code: JU (3) PI-019220

Sr. No.
Treatments Dosage (ga.i./ha) Mean No. of spiders/hill Mean No. of coccinellids/hill
1DBS 7DAS 10DAS 14DAS 1DBS 7DAS 10DAS 14DAS
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 106.75
1.24 1.40 1.16 2.13 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2
T-2 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 160.13 1.12 1.30 1.06 2.45 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3
T-3 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 213.50
1.30 1.36 1.25 2.18 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2
T-4 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 268.10 1.16 1.43 1.32 2.66 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4
T-5 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 427 1.12 1.33 1.21 2.36 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.2
T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90 % EC 8.08 1.45 1.65 1.35 2.45 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.3
T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 1.32 1.58 1.24 2.62 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.4
T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP 500 1.46 1.42 1.12 2.39 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2
T-9 Untreated Control - 1.48 1.33 1.18 2.42 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3
DBS-Days before spray; DAS- Days after spray

Table-16: Phytotoxicity of test insecticides for Leaf tip injury, Chlorosis, Scorching, Epinasty & Hyponasty in rice, Kharif 2023
Protocol-B: Code: JU (3) PI-019220

Sr. No.
Treatments
Dosage (ga.i./ha) Leaf tip injury/Chlorosis/Scorching/Epinasty or Hyponasty/Necrosis(%)
1DBS 1DAS 3DAS 7DAS 10DAS 14DAS
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 106.75
0 0 0 0 0 0
T-2 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 160.13 0 0 0 0 0 0
T-3 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 213.50
0 0 0 0 0 0
T-4 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 268.10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T-5 Emamectin benzoate 1.9% + Bifenthrin 2.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 20.2% WP 427 0 0 0 0 0 0
T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90 % EC 8.08 0 0 0 0 0 0
T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 0 0 0 0 0 0
T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP 500 0 0 0 0 0 0
T-9 Untreated Control - 0 0 0 0 0 0
DBS: Days before spray; DAS: Days after spray

Protocol-C: Table-17: Treatment details: Code: JU (3) PI-030438

Sr. No.
Treatment details Individual component dosages (g a.i./ha) Combined dosages of all components (g a.i./ha) Formulation dose/ha (ml/gm)
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP
17.06 + 18.81 + 167.13 203 437.5
T-2 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP
25.59 + 28.22 + 250.69 304 656.25
T-3 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP
34.13 + 37.63 + 334.25 406 875
T-4 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP
42.85 + 47.25 + 419.72 509.82 1098.75
T-5 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP
68.25 + 75.25 + 668.50 812 1750
T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90% EC (Market standard) - 8.08 425
T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC (Market standard) - 50 500
T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP (Market standard) - 500 1000
T-9 Untreated Check - - -

Protocol-C:Code: JU (3) PI-030438
Table-18: Bio-efficacy of test insecticides against Rice Stem borer in Rice, Kharif 2023-24.

Sr. No. Treatment details Dosage (ga.i./ha) Percent Dead Heart Percent reduction
Over UT Check
DBS 3DAS 7DAS 10DAS 14DAS
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 203 6.15 4.64 3.65 3.27 1.69 80.09

T-2 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 304.5 5.60 4.60 3.60 2.93 1.34 84.22

T-3 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 406 5.77 4.43 2.43 1.87 0.87 89.75

T-4 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 509.82 5.59 3.92 2.26 1.79 0.79 90.69

T-5 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 812 6.32 4.99 2.99 1.66 0.66 92.23

T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90 % EC 8.08 6.31 5.65 4.20 3.53 3.86 54.53

T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 6.76 5.35 4.69 3.79 4.12 51.47

T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP 500 5.36
4.70
4.35
3.35
3.87
54.42
T-9 UntreatedControl - 5.54 7.73 9.19 9.73 8.49 -

DBS- Days before spraying; DAS-Days after spraying; UT- Untreated

Table-19: Bio-efficacy of test insecticides against Rice Stem borer in Rice,Kharif 2023-24.
Protocol-C: Code: JU (3) PI-030438

Sr.No.
Treatment details Dosage (ga.i./ha)
Percent White Ear Percent Reduction over UT Check
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 203 2.37
72.44
T-2 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 304.5 2.06
76.05
T-3 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 406 1.07
87.56
T-4 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 509.82 1.02
88.14
T-5 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 812 0.99
88.49
T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90 % EC 8.08 4.38
49.07
T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 4.27
50.35
T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP 500 4.28
50.23
T-9 Untreated Control - 8.60
-
DBS-Days before spraying; DAS-Days after spraying; UT- Untreated

Table-20:Bio-efficacy of test insecticides against Rice Leaf folder in Rice, Kharif 2023 Protocol-C: Code: JU (3) PI-030438

Sr. No.
Treatment Dosage (ga.i./ha) Percent Leaf damage Percent reduction over UT Check
DBS 3DAS 7DAS 10DAS 14DAS
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 203 5.46 5.59 4.71 2.69 2.89 70.57

T-2 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 304.5 5.62 4.84 4.43 3.65 2.60 73.52

T-3 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 406 6.13 4.67 4.47 1.41 0.45 95.42

T-4 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 509.82 6.61 4.50 3.81 1.32 0.32 96.74

T-5 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 812 6.18 4.41 3.52 1.23 0.21 97.86

T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90 % EC 8.08 7.58 6.48 4.81 4.65 4.54 53.77

T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 6.17 5.49 5.13 4.42 4.45 54.68

T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP 500 5.58 5.01 4.76 4.32 4.86 50.51

T-9 Untreated Control - 5.85 7.31 8.28 8.63 9.82 -

DBS-Days before spraying; DAS-Days after spraying; UT- Untreated

Table-21:Bio-efficacy of test insecticides against Rice Whorl maggot, Kharif 2023-24
Protocol-C: Code: JU (3) PI-030438

Sr. No.
Treatment details Dosage (ga.i./ha) Percent Leaf Damage Percent Reduction over UT Check
DBA 3DAA 7DAA 10DAA 14DAA
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 203 7.62 6.62 5.37 4.52 3.54 69.32
T-2 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 304 7.43 6.54 5.33 4.31 3.33 71.14
T-3 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 406 7.86 5.43 4.54 3.37 2.27 80.33
T-4 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 509.82 7.59 5.37 4.37 3.33 2.00 82.67
T-5 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 812 7.42 5.33 4.31 3.15 1.82 84.23
T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90% EC (Market standard) 8.08 7.59 6.59 5.86 4.37 7.47 35.27
T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC (Market standard) 50 7.37 6.27 5.37 4.27 7.81 32.32
T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP (Market standard) 500 7.33 6.15 4.54 4.15 6.47 43.93
T-9 Untreated Check - 7.54 8.82 9.59 10.31 11.54 0.00
DBA-Days before application; DAA-Days after application; UT- Untreated


Table-22:Bio-efficacy of test insecticides against natural enemy complex in Rice Kharif 2023
Protocol-C: Code: JU (3) PI-030438

Sr. No.
Treatments Dosage (ga.i./ha) Mean No. of spiders/hill Mean No. of coccinellids/hill
1DBS 7DAS 10DAS 14DAS 1DBS 7DAS 10DAS 14DAS
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 203 2.24 1.40 1.16 1.13 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2
T-2 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 304.5 2.12 1.30 1.06 1.45 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3
T-3 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 406 2.30 1.36 1.25 1.18 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2
T-4 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 509.82 2.16 1.43 1.32 1.66 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4
T-5 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 812 2.12 1.33 1.21 1.36 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.2
T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90 % EC 8.08 2.45 2.65 3.35 3.45 0.6 1.4 2.2 2.3
T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 2.32 2.58 3.24 3.62 0.5 1.6 2.3 2.4
T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP 500 2.46 2.42 3.12 3.39 0.5 1.4 2.4 2.2
T-9 Untreated Control - 2.48 2.65 3.18 3.42 0.6 1.6 2.4 2.3
DBS-Days before spray; DAS- Days after spray

Table-23: Phytotoxicity of test insecticides for Leaf tip injury, Chlorosis, Scorching, Epinasty & Hyponasty in rice, Kharif 2023
Protocol-C: Code: JU (3) PI-030438

Sr. No.
Treatments
Dosage (ga.i./ha) Leaf tip injury/Chlorosis/Scorching/Epinasty or Hyponasty/Necrosis(%)
1DBS 1DAS 3DAS 7DAS 10DAS 14DAS
T-1 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 203 0 1 2 3 3 3
T-2 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 304.5 0 2 3 3 3 3
T-3 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 406 0 3 4 4 4 4
T-4 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 509.82 0 4 5 5 5 5
T-5 Emamectin benzoate 3.9% + Bifenthrin 4.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 38.2% WP 812 0 5 6 6 6 6
T-6 Emamectin Benzoate 01.90 % EC 8.08 0 0 0 0 0 0
T-7 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 0 0 0 0 0 0
T-8 Cartap Hydrochloride 50% SP 500 0 0 0 0 0 0
T-9 Untreated Control - 0 0 0 0 0 0
DBS: Days before spray; DAS: Days after spray

Comparison Between Protocol-A, Protocol-B, and Protocol-C: Effectiveness of Trimix Insecticide Combinations
Among the tested formulations, Treatment-3 of Protocol-A (Novel Trimix-Insecticidal Synergistic Combination) has been shown to provide the most promising and economical outcomes for controlling rice pests such as Stem borer, Leaf folder, and Whorl maggot. This formulation outperformed other combinations in terms of pest control and crop safety, highlighting the importance of optimizing the balance between active ingredients and their concentrations.
1. Novel Trimix-Insecticide Combination (JU (3) PI-020329) - Protocol-A:
• Composition: Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP
• Application: Applied upon crossing the Economic Threshold Level (ETL) for insect pests.
• Effectiveness: This treatment showed superior pest control and longer-lasting protection against Stem borer, Leaf folder, and Whorl maggot compared to other formulations.
• Phytotoxicity: No harmful effects on the rice crop (Table 9).
• Market Comparison: Treatment-3 (Protocol-A) outperformed individual market-standard products applied alone (T-6 to T-8) and lower doses of the same combination (T-1 & T-2).
2. Market-Standard Products Comparison:
• Protocol-A (T-3): Demonstrated the best control without causing any phytotoxicity.
• Protocol-B & C:
o Protocol-B: The market-standard formulation did not cause phytotoxic effects but showed inferior pest control compared to Protocol-A.
o Protocol-C: Showed good pest control but caused significant phytotoxic effects, such as leaf injury and necrosis, due to high concentrations and non-optimized ratios in the mixture.
3. Best Treatment Option - Protocol-A (T-3):
• Composition: Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP at 875g/ha (25.38 + 28.87 + 255.50 g a.i./ha).
• Effectiveness: The optimal combination provided the most effective and economical solution for controlling rice pests without phytotoxic effects.
• Synergistic Success: The unique ratio of active ingredients in Protocol-A ensures synergy, enhancing pest control while preserving crop health.
4. Phytotoxicity:
• Protocol-A (T-3): No phytotoxicity observed across all tested dosages.
• Protocol-B & C:
o Protocol-B: No phytotoxicity but inferior pest control.
o Protocol-C: High phytotoxicity including leaf injury, surface tip damage, and necrosis. This adverse effect may result from antagonistic interactions between active ingredients and non-optimal formulation ratios.
5. Impact on Yield:
• Protocol-A (T-3): The formulation contributed to a significant increase in rice yield, with a 45.54 to 45.90% yield increase, reaching 4797 to 4809 kg/ha, which was significantly higher compared to other treatments.
6. Impact on Natural Enemies:
• Protocol-A (T-3): No significant negative impact on the population of natural enemies, such as spiders and coccinellids, making it a safe option for integrated pest management (IPM).
• Protocol-C: Showed adverse effects on natural predators, which could disrupt ecosystem balance.
Conclusion:
The Novel Trimix-Insecticidal Synergistic Combination (Emamectin benzoate 2.9% + Bifenthrin 3.3% + Cartap Hydrochloride 29.2% WP) at 875 g/ha (309.75 g a.i./ha) is the recommended option for managing rice pests. It offers superior pest control, crop safety, and an economic advantage over other treatments, particularly in comparison to Protocol-B and Protocol-C, which either had inferior results or caused phytotoxicity.
,CLAIMS:1. An insecticidal composition comprising:
a) emamectin benzoate in an amount ranging from 0.5 to 15% w/w,
b) bifenthrin in an amount ranging from 0.5-15% w/w; and
c) cartap Hydrochloride in an amount ranging from 15 to 50% w/w.
d) agriculturally acceptable Salts .
2. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein Emamectin benzoate is present in an amount of 2.9 % w/w, Bifenthrin is present in an amount of 3.3% w/w and Cartap Hydrochloride is present in an amount of 29.2 % 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 3, comprising at least wettable powder comprising a Surfactants, Dispersing agent Wetting agent, Adsorbent, and carriers or any combinations thereof.
5 Theinsecticidal composition as claimed in claim 4, wherein said dispersing agent is present in an amount ranging from 2-10% w/w, wetting agent is present in an amount 1-7% w/w, Surfactant is present in an amount 2-8% w/w and Adsorbents is present in an amount of 1-10% w/w .
6. 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 (WG), 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).
7. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 6, wherein said insecticidal composition is formulated in the form of wettable powder (WP).
8. A method for controlling insects in rice, said method comprising treating Rice crop with an insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 1.
9. A process for preparing an insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 1 as wettable powder formulation, said process comprising:
(a) Heat Bifenthrin to 60°C and maintain the temperature for 30 minutes.
(b) In the premixing blender, add Silicon Dioxide to coat the Bifenthrin technical material.
(c) Mix thoroughly for 30 minutes.
(d) Add China Clay, Polyacrylate Copolymer, Sulfonated Kraft Lignin, Naphthalenesulfonic Acid, Methyl-, Polymer with Formaldehyde, Sodium Salt.
(e) Continue mixing for another 30 minutes.
(f) Add Emamectin Benzoate and Cartap Hydrochloride to the blender, one by one.
(g) Mix the entire blend for 1 hour.
(h) Transfer the mixture to an ACM or Jet Mill for milling to achieve the desired particle size (=15µm).
(i) After milling, transfer the material to the post-blender for final blending.