DESC:Synergistic Insecticidal Combinations Comprising Profenofos
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising the combination of organophosphate insecticide with one or more insecticides in EC / WDG / SC / SL / OD / OS / Solid Granules and other formulations in different percentages. More precisely, the subject of the present invention is a synergistic insecticidal composition based on a combination of profenofos with one or more insecticide(s) selected from tebufenozide and abamectin optionally with at least one agrochemical acceptable excipient(s) which will facilitate in the preparation of desired formulations. The present invention also relates to the process for the preparation of synergistic insecticidal composition thereof and use of this combination for combating insecticides in and on the seeds and plants at different growth stages for crop protection and good yields.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Crop protection is the practice of protecting the crop yields from pests, weeds, plant diseases, and other organisms that damage agricultural crops, which is critical from early stages of crop development. Preventing pests and diseases in the entire crop cycle, i.e., from root development to maturing crop, leads to increased crop quality and yield. The control of insects is extremely important in achieving high crop efficiency. Generally, insects are very destructive to crop plants and can significantly reduce crop yields and quality. Insecticides help to minimize this damage by controlling insect pests. For this purpose, in the field of agrochemical industry, numerous formulations are available for delivering active ingredients or combinations, but there is still a continues need to develop new insecticidal combinations which are more effective, less costly, less toxic, environmentally safer and have different sites of action. The use of two or more appropriate active ingredient combinations in specific dose ratios leads to synergism in crop protection.
Therefore, it is indeed necessary to use the insecticidal combinations in lower doses, fast acting with the different mode of action in a suitable formulation that can provide long lasting control against broad spectrum insects. The composition should have high synergistic action, no cross resistance to existing insecticides, avoid excess loading residue 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.
To reduce the risk of the selection strains, mixtures of different active compounds are employed for controlling insect-pests. It is possible to ensure successful control over a relatively long period of time by combining active compounds having different mechanisms of action.
Thus, the present inventors have intensively studied to solve these problems, identified a need for a granular formulation and advantages of ease of use, safety, and environmental compatibility.
OBJECTS OF THE INVENTION
The principal object of the present invention is to provide an insecticidal mixture or combination which solves at least one of the major problems discussed above like reducing the dosage rate, broadening the spectrum of activity, or combining activity with prolonged pest control and resistance management with improved environmental safety by reducing toxicity and residue deposit in soil and in crops.
The details of one or more embodiments of this disclosure are set forth in the accompanying description below and other features, objects, and advantages will be apparent from the description and the claims.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
In an embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising organophosphate insecticide with one or more insecticide(s) selected from diacyl hydrazine insecticides or macrocyclic lactone insecticides with at least one or more agrochemical acceptable excipients.
In an aspect of the present invention provides an insecticidal composition comprising organophosphate insecticide with one or more insecticide(s) selected from diacyl hydrazine insecticides or macrocyclic lactone insecticides with one or more suitable agrochemical auxiliaries, wherein the suitable agrochemical excipients are selected from the group comprising of a carrier, surfactant, stabilizer, anti-freezing agent, antifoaming agent, anticaking agent, dispersing agent, and adjuvant(s).
In an aspect of present invention the insecticidal composition can be applied as a foliar spray, soil drenching, seed dressing, application to the targeted crops, plants and trees.
In an embodiment of the present invention the formulation excipients or inactive excipients are used in present emulsifiable concentrate formulation are selected from green solvent, co-solvent (if needed), emulsifier, antifoaming agent, stabilizers, and adjuvant(s).
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
The present disclosure / specification refers to a synergistic insecticidal composition and the process for the preparation for crop protection.
The term “combination” can be replaced with the words “mixture” or “composition” or “formulation” defined or refers to as combining two or more active ingredients formulated in desired formulations.
The term “agrochemical auxiliaries” can be replaced with the words “formulation excipients” or “inactive excipients” or “agriculturally acceptable excipients” or “agrochemical excipients” or “agrochemical acceptable excipients”.
The term “pesticide” as used in this specification refers to a substance or mixture of substances intended for preventing, destroying, repelling, or mitigating any pest or weeds which causes damage to the crop. Herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides are mainly used as pesticides which control weeds and insect pests and disease-causing pathogens respectively that eventually leads to high yield of crops.
The term “insecticide” as used in this specification refers to a type of chemical compound or substance or substance mixtures, specifically designed to protect crops by inhibit, control or reduce the damage of crops from insects and kill insects in various agricultural, residential, and public health settings. Integrated pest management practices are encouraged, combining multiple strategies, including cultural, biological, and chemical methods, to reduce reliance on insecticides solely and promote pest control. Insecticides may be a chemical substance, a biological agent such as virus or bacteria, an antimicrobial agent, a disinfectant or any other agent. Many insecticides are harmful for the human by causing disease and threat, so the formulation / combination of insecticides manufacturers always searches the ways for developing the mixture of insecticides in a way that is safer for the environment, human beings and other non-targeted organisms to provides more effective and economical use against the targeted insects.
The term “synergism” as used in this specification refers to the interaction between two or more active compounds or other factors to produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their individual effects. The present invention involves the mixture of two active ingredients which has increased efficacy when compared to individual use and admixture of those components.
Conventional insecticides have poor activity, limited to certain insects, and are not satisfactorily maintained for prolonged periods. Even though some insecticides may bear satisfactory insecticidal effects, but they require improvements in respect of environment and health safety and are also required to achieve a high insecticidal effect at a smaller dosage and lack resistance management.
We found that this objective in part or as a whole can be achieved by the combination of active compounds defined at the outset. The present inventors have intensively studied to solve these problems. We have found that by combining insecticide composition having profenofos and with one or more insecticide(s) selected from tebufenozide and abamectin optionally with at least one agrochemical acceptable excipient(s) in different formulation and percentages have astonishing effects of controlling insects and by reducing amount of dosage than in a case of using an active compound alone and admixture of those compounds.
Therefore, the present invention provides a novel synergistic insecticide composition having profenofos and one or more insecticide(s) selected from tebufenozide and/or abamectin purpose thereof. The synergy of insecticide composition has the main effective components of profenofos with tebufenozide and/or abamectin acts by inhibition of enzyme acetylcholine esterase, mimic the action of the molting hormone ecdysone in insects and cause paralysis and death by affecting the chloride ion channels in nerve cells, respectively and can generate efficient synergism by means of contact, stomach and ovicidal action and can enable broad spectrum satisfactory insect control and protect the several crop from sucking, chewing, caterpillars, borer pests and soil insects and check the resistance development in insects in several crops for prolonged period at lower dose with no phytotoxic effect. This combination is also helpful in controlling insect vectors which transmit viral diseases in plants, and it can also be used in public health and household purposes for pest control. This can be a unique insecticide combination than the existing ones.
According to current practice, formulations of profenofos with one or more insecticide selected from tebufenozide and / or abamectin developed in the form of Emulsifiable Concentrates (EC), Dispersible Concentrates (DC), Oil Dispersions (OD), Suspension Concentrates (SC), Soluble Liquids (SL), Suspoemulsion (SE), Emulsion Concentrates (EW), Microemulsions, Wettable Powders (WP), Water-Dispersible Granules (WG), Soluble Powders (SP), Granules (G), Oil Solutions (OS), Aqueous Suspensions (AS), Aqueous Solutions (AS), Microencapsulated Suspensions (ME), and Microencapsulated Emulsions (MEC), mixed formulation of Suspension Concentrate and Capsule Suspension (ZC) and other conventional formulation and with different percentages and can be used as curative, and preventive combination for foliar applications or soil applications.
Furthermore, the combinations of the present invention, is yet not known in the present the state of the art. The formulation comprising profenofos with tebufenozide and / or abamectin that are used together in Emulsifiable concentrate (EC) formulation according to the present invention have been observed to provide great efficacy at low dose, exhibit insecticidal and acaricidal action against the insects damaging the agricultural crops and achieve the successful results, which were not possible to obtain previously with any insecticide.
The present invention involves the mixture of two active ingredients which are classified under organophosphate insecticides with one or more insecticide(s) selected from diacyl hydrazine insecticides and / or macrocyclic lactone are described herein thereof.
Organophosphates (OP) are chemical substances produced by the process of esterification between phosphoric acid and alcohol. It kills insects primarily by phosphorylation of the acetylcholinesterase enzyme (AChE) at nerve endings. The result is a loss of available AChE so that it overstimulated by the excess acetylcholine (ACh), the impulse-transmitting substance in the nerve ending of insects eventually causes death of insects.
Profenofos (IUPAC name: 4-bromo-2-chloro-1-[ethoxy(propylsulfanyl) phosphoryl] oxybenzene) Molecular formula: C11H15BrClO3PS) is a broad-spectrum organophosphate (OP), non-systemic insecticide and acaricide which exhibits a translaminar effect and has ovicidal properties used for insect and mite control on a wide variety of crops and outstanding profile of low mammalian toxicity. Profenofos involves inhibition of the enzyme acetylcholinesterase (AChE) via phosphorylation of the serine residue at the active site of the enzyme. This inhibition leads to accumulation of acetylcholine and ultimately cause neurotoxicity in the central and/or peripheral nervous system leads to death of pest. It is used to control tobacco budworm, cotton bollworm, armyworms (fall, beet), cotton aphid, spider mites, plant bugs, flea hoppers, and whiteflies on cotton, maize, sugar beet, soya beans, potatoes, vegetables, tobacco, and other crops.
Diacyl hydrazine insecticides, also known as ecdysone agonists, are a class of insecticides that mimic the action of the molting hormone ecdysone in insects which disrupts the insect growth and development, causing abnormal results during larval development, arrest pupation and eventual death of insects. Tebufenozide having IUPAC name: 3,5-Dimethylbenzoic acid 1-(1,1-dimethylethyl) -2-(4-ethylbenzoyl) hydrazide is an insecticide belonging to diacyl hydrazine class of insecticides that acts as a non-steroidal agonist of the insect ecdysone receptor. Tebufenozide is a type of insect growth regulator (IGR) that interferes with the molting process in insects. This disrupts their growth and development by mimicking the effects of a natural hormone called ecdysone. By binding to and triggering the ecdysone receptor in insects, Tebufenozide causes early and incomplete molting, ultimately resulting in the insect's death due to the inability to grow and mature properly.
Macrocyclic lactone insecticides are a class of insecticides derived from natural products or synthesized from them. It works by interfering with the nervous system of insects and mites. They cause paralysis and death by affecting the chloride ion channels in nerve cells. They are effective against a broad spectrum of insects and mites, including Lepidoptera (caterpillars), Coleoptera (beetles), Diptera (flies), Homoptera (aphids, scales), and mites. Some of the key macrocyclic lactone insecticides include:
Avermectins derived from the soil bacterium Streptomyces avermitillus and is effective against a wide range of insects, including mosquitoes, flies and insects. This subgroup includes compounds such as abamectin, ivermectin, and doramectin.
Milbemycins including compounds such as milbemectin and moxidectin, are another important subclass of macrocyclic lactone antibiotics. They are effective against a variety of pests including nematodes, mites, and insects.
Spinosines share similar properties and are frequently associated with them. Spinosines are derived from the fermentative components of the soil actinomycete Saccharopolyspora spinosa and are effective against pests such as thrips, moths and worms. Examples include spinosaid and spinotorum.
Abamectin is a semi synthetic derivative of avermectin that stimulates the gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) system, a chemical “transmitter” produced at nerve endings, which inhibits both nerve to nerve and nerve to muscle communication. The affected insect becomes paralyzed, stops feeding, and dies after a few days. It is used against mites and leaf-miners, is said to spare some of the major parasites of the miner and some predacious mites. When applied to foliage, it is absorbed by the leaves, where feeding insects encounter the poison.
The first embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
at least one organophosphate insecticide; and
at least one insecticide selected from diacyl hydrazine insecticide and / or macrocyclic lactone insecticide.
First aspect of the first embodiment, the organophosphate insecticide is selected from the group comprising but not limited to azothoate, bromophos, chlorthiophos, cyanophos, cythioate, dicapthon, dichlofenthion, etaphos, famphur, fenchlorphos, fenitrothion, fensulfothion, fenthion, heterophos, jodfenphos, mesulfenfos, parathion, phosnichlor, profenofos, prothiofos, sulprofos, temephos, trichlormetaphos-3, trifenofos and xiaochongliulin.
The second aspect of the first embodiment, the diacyl hydrazine insecticides, are selected from the group comprising but not limited to chromafenozide, fufenozide, halofenozide, methoxy fenozide, tebufenozide, and yishijing.
The third aspect of the first embodiment, the macrocyclic lactone insecticides, are selected from the group comprising but not limited to avermectin insecticides like abamectin, doramectin, emamectin, eprinomectin, ivermectin, and selamectin.
The fourth aspect of the first embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of organophosphate insecticide with at least one insecticide selected from diacyl hydrazine insecticide and/or macrocyclic lactone insecticide; wherein organophosphate insecticide and second insecticide are present in the weight ratio of (1-80): (1-80).
The second embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
at least one organophosphate insecticide;
at least one insecticide selected from diacyl hydrazine insecticide and / or macrocyclic lactone insecticide; and
at least one agrochemical acceptable excipient.
First aspect of the second embodiment, the organophosphate insecticide is selected from the group comprising but not limited to azothoate, bromophos, chlorthiophos, cyanophos, cythioate, dicapthon, dichlofenthion, etaphos, famphur, fenchlorphos, fenitrothion, fensulfothion, fenthion, heterophos, jodfenphos, mesulfenfos, parathion, phosnichlor, profenofos, prothiofos, sulprofos, temephos, trichlormetaphos-3, trifenofos, and xiaochongliulin.; preferably profenofos.
The second aspect of the second embodiment, the diacyl hydrazine insecticides, are selected from the group comprising but not limited to chromafenozide, fufenozide, halofenozide, methoxy fenozide, tebufenozide, and yishijing; preferably tebufenozide.
The third aspect of the second embodiment, the macrocyclic lactone insecticides is selected from the group comprising but not limited to avermectin insecticides like abamectin, doramectin, emamectin, eprinomectin, ivermectin, and selamectin; preferably abamectin.
The fourth aspect of the first embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of organophosphate insecticide with at least one insecticide selected from diacyl hydrazine insecticide and/or macrocyclic lactone insecticide; wherein organophosphate insecticide and second insecticide are present in the weight ratio of (1-80): (1-80); preferably in the ratio of (1-60): (1-20).
The fifth aspect of the second embodiment, agrochemical acceptable excipient selected from but not limited to the group comprising carrier, surfactant, stabilizer, anti-freezing agent, antifoaming agent, anticaking agent, dispersing agent, and adjuvant(s). These are selected according to the respective types of formulation requirements, and which will facilitate in the preparation different formulations.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, carrier can be selected from liquid medium or solid medium which will provides a stable environment to the formulation. Wherein liquid medium selected from but not limited to water and organic solvents incudes hydrocarbon solvents and cycloalkanes, ether solvents, ester solvents, ketones solvents, alcohols solvents and polar-aprotic solvents.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, surfactant includes wetting agent and emulsifier.
Further aspect of the present invention, emulsifier includes anionic emulsifiers, cationic emulsifiers, non-ionic emulsifiers, amphoteric emulsifiers, phospholipids, glyceryl esters and other commercially available emulsifiers.
Further aspect of the present invention, anionic emulsifiers selected from but not limited to sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS), sodium dodecyl benzenesulfonate (SDBS), alkyl sulfates, alkyl ethoxylate sulfates and calcium alkyl benzene sulfonate.
Further aspect of the present invention, cationic emulsifiers selected from but not limited to cetyl trimethyl ammonium bromide (CTAB) and stearalkonium chloride.
Further aspect of the present invention non-ionic emulsifiers selected from but not limited to polysorbate 80, polysorbate 20, sorbitan monolaurate, alkyl ethoxylates, sorbitan monooleate and polyaryl sulfate esters.
Further aspect of the present invention, amphoteric emulsifiers selected from but not limited to cocamidopropyl betaine, lauramidopropyl betaine; ethoxylated emulsifiers: ethoxylated nonylphenol (nonylphenol ethoxylate), ethoxylated sorbitan esters, and ethoxylated fatty alcohols.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, wetting agent is selected from but not limited to alkyl aryl sulfonates, alkyl phenol ethoxylates / propoxylates, alkoxylates, ethoxylated alkoxylates, alkyl aryl poly alkoxy ether, alkyl polyglucosides, polysorbates, polyethylene glycol esters, polysorbate, polyethylene oxide (PEO), ethoxylated or propoxylated fatty alcohols and/or acids and/or amines, ethoxylated or propoxylated synthetic alcohols, alkyl aryl sulphates, ethoxylated alkyl aryl sulphates, ethoxylated vegetable oils, ethoxylated sorbitan esters, phosphated esters, propylene glycol esters, sodium lauryl sulfate, cocoamidopropyl betaine and block copolymers selected from the but not limited to styrene-butadiene block copolymer (SBS), butyl based block copolymer, poly(ethylene oxide)-poly(propylene oxide)-poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO-PPO-PEO), polystyrene-poly(ethylene oxide) (PS-PEO), poly(butadiene)-poly(styrene) (PB-PS), poly(methyl methacrylate)-poly(butadiene)-poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA-PB-PMMA), poly(caprolactone)-poly(ethylene glycol) (PCL-PEG), poly(ethylene glycol)-poly(propylene glycol)-poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG-PPG-PEG), and other commercially available wetting agents.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, stabilizer includes antioxidant, chelating agent, pH adjusters, UV absorber, stabilizing polymers, and inert material.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, stabilizers selected from group vegetable and seed oils selected from but not limited to soybean oil, sunflower seed oil, coconut oil, peanut oil, corn oil, castor oil, palm oil, rapeseed oil, safflower oil, olive oil, corn oil, cottonseed oil, linseed oil, tung oil and sesame oil and oxidized forms of the above oils.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, inert material selected from but not limited to quartz, kaolin clay, attapulgite clay, acidic clay, attapulgite, zeolite, bentonite, montmorillonite, acid white clay, pyrophyllite, talc, diatomaceous earth and calcite, china clay, corn rachis powder, walnut husk powder, urea, calcium carbonate, ammonium sulfate, silicon oxides (precipitated silica) and other commercially available inert materials.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, anti-freezing agent selected from but not limited to ethylene glycol, propylene glycol, glycerol, calcium chloride, sodium acetate, potassium acetate, urea, and other commercially available anti-freezing agents.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, antifoaming agents selected from but not limited to silicone-based antifoams, polyethylene glycol-based antifoams, mineral oil-based antifoams, ethylene glycol-based antifoams, polysorbate-based antifoams, dimethicone-based antifoams, polypropylene glycol-based antifoams, vegetable oil-based antifoams, alkyl siloxane-based antifoams, fatty acid-based antifoams, and other commercially available antifoaming agents.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, anticaking agent selected from silica-based compounds includes silicon dioxide (silica), precipitated silica (amorphous form of silicon dioxide), calcium silicate, magnesium stearate, sodium aluminosilicate, potassium aluminium silicate, tricalcium phosphate, sodium ferrocyanide, calcium carbonate, diatomaceous earth, sodium bicarbonate, and other commercially available anticaking agents.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, dispersing agents selected from but not limited to polyethylene glycol, polysorbate, poly acrylate, poly(methyl methacrylate), polyvinyl alcohol, poly ethoxylated alcohol, poly ethoxylated fatty acids, polyacrylic acid, polyvinylpyrrolidone, alkyl sulfonates, aryl sulfonates, sodium tripolyphosphate, sodium dodecyl sulfate, sodium lignosulfonate, sodium carboxymethyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl methylcellulose, sorbitan esters (e.g., sorbitan monolaurate, sorbitan monooleate), gum arabic and carbomer and/or their comb polymers; preferably poly(methyl methacrylate), polyethylene glycol comb polymer, and other commercially available dispersing agents.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, adjuvant includes but not limited to colorant, spreader, modifier, sticker, penetrant, drift control agent, buffering agent, thickener, compatibility agent, binders and safener.
The further aspect of the second embodiment, colorant is color dye selected from natural, synthetic and commercially available dyes.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, binder / sticking agent selected from but not limited to methyl cellulose, ethyl cellulose, hydroxy propyl methyl cellulose, hydroxy propyl cellulose, gum, sodium carboxy methyl cellulose, polyvinyl pyrrolidone, polyethylene glycol, polyvinyl alcohol, polymethacrylates and other commercially available binders.
Further aspect of second embodiment, thickener selected from but not limited to polysaccharides / carboxymethyl cellulose / bentonite clay, hydroxy propyl cellulose montmorillonite, bentonite, magnesium aluminium silicate, attapulgite and other commercially available thickeners.
The further aspect of the second embodiment, modifier includes drift control modifiers, rain fastness modifiers, anti-foaming modifiers, UV stabilizers, pH modifiers, compatibility modifiers and rheology modifier.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, rheology modifier is bentonite and pH modifiers is triethanolamine and phosphoric acid.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, preservatives is antibacterial agent selected from but not limited to triclosan, triclocarban, clotrimazole, miconazole, copper-based compounds, chlorothalonil, benzisothiazolin-3-one (BIT), 5-chloro-2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one, 2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one (MIT), octylisothiazolinone (OIT), dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid, sodium salt (DBSA) and and other commercially available preservatives.
The third embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
profenofos;
at least one insecticide selected from tebufenozide and / or abamectin;
carrier;
stabilizer;
antifoaming agent;
emulsifier / wetting agent; and
adjuvant (s).
The first aspect of the third embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of profenofos with tebufenozide and/or abamectin; wherein profenofos with second insecticide are present in the weight ratio of (1-80):(1-80); preferably in the ratio of (1-50):(1-20).
The second aspect of the third embodiment, agriculturally acceptable excipient selected from but not limited to carrier, emulsifier and wetting agent, stabilizer, antifoaming agent, and adjuvant (s). These are selected according to the respective types of formulation requirements, and which will facilitate in the preparation different formulations.
Further aspect of third embodiment, carrier can be selected from liquid medium or solid medium which will provides a stable environment to the formulation. Wherein liquid medium selected from but not limited to water and organic solvents incudes hydrocarbon solvents and cycloalkanes, ether solvents, ester solvents, ketones solvents, alcohols solvents and polar-aprotic solvents; preferably hydrocarbon solvents and polar-aprotic solvents.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, emulsifier includes anionic emulsifier, and non-ionic emulsifier.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, anionic emulsifier selected from but not limited to sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS), sodium dodecyl benzenesulfonate (SDBS), alkyl sulfates, and calcium alkyl benzene sulfonate.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, non-ionic emulsifier selected from but not limited to polysorbate, castor oil ethoxylates, sorbitan monolaurate, ethoxylates, sorbitan monooleate, polyalkyl sulfate esters, and polyaryl sulfate esters.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, wetting agent is selected from but not limited to alkyl aryl sulfonates, alkyl phenol ethoxylates/ propoxylates, alkoxylates, ethoxylated alkoxylates, alkyl aryl poly alkoxy ether, alkyl polyglucosides, polysorbates, polyethylene glycol esters, polysorbate, polyethylene oxide (PEO), ethoxylated or propoxylated fatty alcohols and/or acids and/or amines, ethoxylated or propoxylated synthetic alcohols, alkyl aryl sulphates, ethoxylated alkyl aryl sulphates, ethoxylated vegetable oils, ethoxylated sorbitan esters, phosphated esters, propylene glycol esters, sodium lauryl sulfate, cocoamidopropyl betaine and block copolymers selected from the but not limited to styrene-butadiene block copolymer (SBS), butyl based block copolymer, poly(ethylene oxide)-poly(propylene oxide)-poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO-PPO-PEO), polystyrene-poly(ethylene oxide) (PS-PEO), poly(butadiene)-poly(styrene) (PB-PS), poly(methyl methacrylate)-poly(butadiene)-poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA-PB-PMMA), poly(capro lactone)-poly(ethylene glycol) (PCL-PEG), poly(ethylene glycol)-poly(propylene glycol)-poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG-PPG-PEG), and other commercially available wetting agents.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, stabilizer selected from group vegetable and seed oils selected from but not limited to soybean oil, sunflower seed oil, coconut oil, peanut oil, corn oil, castor oil, palm oil, rapeseed oil, safflower oil, olive oil, cottonseed oil, linseed oil, tung oil and sesame oil and their oxidized forms.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, adjuvant includes but not limited to colorant, spreader, modifier, sticker, penetrant, drift control agent, buffering agent, thickener, compatibility agent, binders and safener.
The further aspect of the third embodiment, modifier includes drift control modifiers, rain fastness modifiers, anti-foaming modifiers, UV stabilizers, pH modifiers, compatibility modifiers and rheology modifier.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, rheology modifier is bentonite and pH modifiers is triethanolamine and phosphoric acid.
The fourth embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
profenofos;
at least one insecticide selected from tebufenozide and / or abamectin;
naphthalene;
n-methyl pyrrolidone;
calcium alkyl benzene sulfonate;
castor oil ethoxylates/corn oil; and
epoxidized soyabean oil.
First aspect of the fourth embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of profenofos with tebufenozide and/or abamectin; wherein profenofos with second insecticide are present in the weight ratio of (1-80):(1-80); preferably in the ratio of (1-50):(1-20).
Further aspect of the fourth embodiment, the composition of fourth embodiment is formulated as emulsifiable concentrate (EC).
The fifth embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
profenofos;
tebufenozide;
vegetable Oil;
calcium alkyl benzen sulfonate;
polyaryl sulfate esters;
bentonite; and
triethanolamine
First aspect of the fifth embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of profenofos and tebufenozide; wherein profenofos and tebufenozide are present in the weight ratio of (1-80):(1-80); preferably in the ratio of (1-50):(1-20).
Further aspect of the fifth embodiment, the composition of fifth embodiment is formulated as Oil dispersion (OD).
Another embodiment of the present invention provides a process for the preparation of an insecticidal emulsifiable concentrate formulation comprising:
add liquid medium into premix vessel,
add profenofos with one or more insecticide selected from tebufenozide and / or abamectin to the above mixture and stir for 30-60 minutes to get homogenous mixture.
add emulsifier, stabilizer and optionally add adjuvant(s) to the above vessel under continuous stirring,
mix well until a homogenous mixture is obtained, pack the formulation and seal it.
Another embodiment of the present invention provides a process for the preparation of an insecticidal oil dispersion formulation comprising:
add vegetable oil into premix vessel;
add profenofos and tebufenozide to the above vessel and stir for 30-60 minutes to get homogenous mixture and and pass-through horizontal bead mill up to get desired particle size; and
add anionic, non-ionic emulsifier and pH modifier into the above mixture stir for 30-45 min, then add the rheology modifier up to get desired viscosity, pack the formulation and seal it.
Another embodiment of the present invention, the other alternative formulations other than described herein can be prepared using conventional processes and different methods known in the art by selecting appropriate agrochemical acceptable excipient(s) to get the suitable desired formulation of present invention combination.
Another embodiment of the present invention, the insecticidal composition obtained from the present used to control and destroys insect pests such as but not limited to aphids, whiteflies, trims, leafhoppers, leaf miners, sawflies, mole cricket, white grubs, jassids, thrips, lace bugs, billbugs, beetles, mealybugs, sawfly larvae, fleas, cockroaches, ticks, ants, carpet beetles, and mosquitoes on several crops. It controls the insects of numerous crops such as but not limited to paddy, cereals, fruits, vegetables, flowers and ornamental plants, trees, and others. Fruit crops such as apples, citrus fruits, grapes, and berries. Vegetable crops include tomatoes, peppers, cucumbers, and leafy greens. Field crops like corn, soybeans, cotton, and wheat.
Another embodiment of the present invention, the insecticidal composition further comprises at least another agrochemical selected from a fungicide, insecticide, herbicide, biocide, nutrient, plant growth regulator, plant activator, fertilizers and likewise.
Another embodiment of the present invention, the insecticidal composition obtained from the present inventions shows synergistic effects of better pest control with minimum resistance and resurgence and improved crop yield and quality.
Another embodiment of the present invention, the synergistic insecticidal composition can be used for prophylactic application and control the pests by applying effective amount of insecticidal composition over the target areas by conventional spraying methods, such as foliar application soil drenching etc., and avoiding excessive drift or runoff of the composition, securing thorough coverage.
Another embodiment of the present invention, synergistic insecticidal combination decreases natural hazardous effect of single active ingredient and minimizes the residue deposition in environment.
Another embodiment of the present invention, a method of controlling pests and insects comprising synergistic insecticidal composition applying to crop in effective amount by conventional methods.
The best mode of carrying present invention is described in the below given examples. These examples are merely for illustrative purposes only, not to determine the scope of the invention and in no way limit the scope or spirit of the present invention.

EXAMPLES:
EXAMPLE 1: DIFFERENT FORMULATIONS OF SYNERGISTIC INSECTICIDAL COMPOSITION OF THE PRESENT INVENTION:
TABLE 1.1: EMULSIFIABLE CONCENTRATE (EC)
S. No Ingredients Weight / Weight %
1 Profenofos 40
2 Tebufenozide 15
3 Epoxidized Soyabean Oil 3
4 Calcium alkyl benzene sulfonate 2.4
5 Castor oil ethoxylates 9.6
6 N-methyl pyrrolidone 15
7 Naphthalene QS
Total 100
Table 1.2: EMULSIFIABLE CONCENTRATE (EC)
S. No Ingredient Weight / Weight %
1 Profenofos 44
2 Abamectin 1
3 Epoxidized Soyabean Oil 3
4 Calcium alkyl benzene sulfonate 2.4
5 Castor oil ethoxylates 9.6
6 N-methyl pyrrolidone 15
7 Naphthalene QS
Total 100
Table 1.3: OIL DISPERSION (OD)
S. No Ingredient Weight / Weight %
1 Profenofos 40
2 Tebufenozide 15
3 Calcium alkyl benzen sulfonate 3
4 Polyaryl sulfate esters 2.4
5 Bentonite 9.6
6 Triethanolamine 15
7 Vegetable Oil QS
Total 100

Table 1.4: SUSPENSION CONCENTRATES (SC)
S. No Ingredient Weight / Weight %
1 Profenofos 40
2 Tebufenozide 15
3 Block copolymer 2.5
4 Comb Polymer 2.5
5 Propylene Glycol 5
6 Benzisothiazolin-3-one 0.1
7 Siloxane polyalkyleneoxide 0.5
8 Polysaccharides 0.3
9 DM water QS
Total 100
EXAMPLE 2: BIO EFFICACY AND PHYTOTOXICITY TESTS OF THE PRESENT INVENTION
Methodology:
Presently to evaluate the efficacy of novel profenofos combinations against different pests on different crops. The profenofos combinations i.e. Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% and Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 15% in EC formulations were evaluated against different pests on different crops and to test their phytotoxicity on the crop after two sprayings have been conducted. For evaluation of Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC, the efficacy was tested on sucking pests like thrips and mites in chilli crop and for Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 15% EC against leaf folder in paddy, fall armyworm in maize and tobacco caterpillar in soybean crop were tested. The test molecule is tested at three dose levels viz., low, medium, and high along with the sole molecule as individual treatments and their efficiency comparison is done with the current competitive market standards. The test molecules are tested at three different formulation strengths i.e., Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC (500ml/ha 625ml/ha and 750ml/ha) formulation, Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 15% EC (800ml/ha, 1000ml/ha and 1200ml/ha) formulation, the market standards used for chilli mites i.e., Cyenopyrafen 30% SC @ 300ml/ha, Propargite 42% + Hexythiazox 2% EC @ 1250ml/ha and Profenofos 40% + Fenpyroximate 2.50% EC @ 1000ml/ha, chilli thrips i.e., Spinetoram 11.7% SC @ 500ml/ha, Fipronil 5% SC @ 1000ml/ha and Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% + Fipronil 35% SC @ 750 ml/ha and for leaf folder in paddy, fall armyworm in maize and tobacco caterpillar in soybean i.e., Flubendiamide 39.35% SC @ 150ml/ha and Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC @ 150ml/ha. To justify the results, the overall effect and other parameters are calculated over untreated check and to see their effect on crop, its yield is recorded. The crops are first divided into plots for each treatment and replicated three times following Randomized Block Design. The spraying method followed was foliar application with the help of a knapsack sprayer and two sprays are done when the pests reach their ETL. The interval between two sprays is 15 Days.
Method of Observations:
a. Thrips/Mites - No. of adults or nymphs /plant: select 5 random plants in the plot
b. Fall armyworm/ Leaf folder/Tobacco Caterpillar - No. of larva /plant: select 5 random plants in the plot and count the number of insects.
The observations were taken at 1 day before spraying and at 1 day, 4 days, 7 Days, and 10 Days after spraying. The average number of insects were also calculated at the end of each spray (two sprays).
Take the observation on the crop safety of the insecticide i.e., Phytotoxicity / softener observation of insecticide after application at 5 and 10 Days after application.
Parameters of Observations:
The insect pests controlled in each treatment are counted as number of larvae per plant or on the basis of damage and then calculated as percent reduction in population/ damage over untreated or controlled plot. The percent reduction is calculated by the following formula –
% reduction = (No.of larva in control plot-No.of larva in treated plot )/(No.of larva in control plot)× 100
The effect of these insecticides in combination and alone when applied on crops is assessed based on the yield (quintal per hectare) and crops like soybean, maize percent pod damage and percent cob damage was also screened. This parameter defines the crop yield quality along with the quantitative outcomes, qualitative outcomes are to be observed too.
Results:
The insecticide combinations viz., Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% and Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 15% in EC formulations is effective against wide range of insect pests, so the different insect pests controlled in different crops in the field experiments were enlisted below:
Chilli – Thrips (Scirtothrips dorsalis)
Chilli – Mites (Polyphagotrsonemus latus)
Paddy– Leaf folder (Cnaphalocrocis medinalis)
Maize – Fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda)
Soybean – Tobacco caterpillar (Spodoptera litura)

Example – 1: Chilli - Thrips
Table 1. Efficacy of first spray application of Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC formulation against Thrips in Chilli.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of Nymphs or Adults per Plant
(Days After Spraying) % Reduction in Pest Population
Pre 1 4 7 10 AVG
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC 500 17 6.8 0.8 1.8 3.8 6.04 92.12
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC 625 15 4 1 3 4 2.34 93.32
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC 750 15.2 3 0 0 0 3.35 97.86
Profenofos 50% EC 1000 15.12 10 8 9.32 12.32 8.92 78.12
Abamectin 1.9% EC 375 17.6 13 10 12 13 8.20 73.18
Spinetoram 11.7% SC 500 15.3 11 7 8.15 10 8.64 79.60
Fipronil 5% SC 1000 19.528 14 9.728 10 12.67 12.75 73.75
Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% + Fipronil 3.5% SC 750 11.82 9.76 4.72 7.72 11.72 8.74 81.29
Untreated check 29.6 35 42 51 57 33.58 0.00
The thrips population before initiating the spraying was recorded in between 11.8-19.5 thrips per plant in chilli. After the first application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC when applied at 625 ml/ha and 750 ml/ha showed maximum reduction in thrips population of 4 and 3 thrips/plant at 1 days after spraying and 1, 3, 4 thrips/plant at 4, 7, 10 das when applied at 625ml/ha and 0 thrips/plant at 4, 7 and 10 das. The average thrips population after the entire spraying was recorded to be lowest in Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 625 ml/ha with 2.34 thrips/plant followed by Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 750 ml/ha with 3.35 thrips/plant which were performing superior to market standards by the end of first spray. The percent reduction in thrips population recorded in all the treatments proved that Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC when applied at 750ml/ha was showing maximum reduction in thrips population as 97.86% and at 625ml/ha recorded 93.32% there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the doses of 750, 625 ml/ha showed synergistic activity and thrips population control was superior to market standard. Even the treatment Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC when applied at 500 ml/ha (lowest dose of the insecticide combination) also showed a percent reduction of 92.12% which was also superior to the market standard. Though the first spray application of combination insecticides showed significant reduction in thrips population in chilli. While the same insecticides when applied alone at the end of first spraying Profenofos 50% EC @ 1000ml/ha recorded 78.12% reduction and Abamectin 1.9% EC @ 375 ml/ha recorded 73.18% reduction.
Table 2. Efficacy of second spray application of Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC formulation against Thrips in Chilli.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of Nymphs or Adults per Plant
(Days After Spraying) % Reduction in Pest Population Colby’ ratio
Pre 1 4 7 10 AVG
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC 500 3.8 1.80 0.00 0.58 2 1.10 98.58 1.50
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC 625 4 0.00 0.00 0 1 0.25 99.68 1.52
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC 750 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 100.00 1.52
Profenofos 50% EC 1000 12.32 25.00 37.00 47 78 46.75 39.48 0.60
Abamectin 1.9% EC 375 13 22.00 31.00 47 75 43.75 43.37 0.66
Spinetoram 11.7% SC 500 10 9.12 8.60 39 57 28.43 63.20 0.96
Fipronil 5% SC 1000 12.67 10.65 8.76 38 54 27.85 63.94 0.97
Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% + Fipronil 3.5% SC 750 11.72 10.00 8.98 35 58 28.00 63.76 0.97
Untreated check 57 64.00 75 79 91 77.25 0.00 0.00 0.00
The thrips population before initiating the second spray was recorded in between 0-12.32 thrips per plant in chilli. This pre-treatment population the thrips population recorded at the end of the first spraying. After the second application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC when applied at 750ml/ha showed maximum reduction in thrips population by recording 0 thrips/plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 Days after spraying and when applied at 625ml/ha recorded 0 thrips/plant at 1, 4, 7 days after spraying and 1 thrips/plant at 10 days after spraying. The average thrips population after the entire spraying was recorded to be lowest in Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 750 ml/ha with 0 thrips/plant followed by Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 625 ml/ha with 0.25 thrips/plant which were performing superior to market standards. The percent reduction in thrips population recorded in all the treatments proved that Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC when applied at 750 ml/ha was showing maximum reduction in thrips population as 100% followed by Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 625 ml/ha with 99.99% reduction and Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 500 ml/ha recorded 97.19% there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the doses of 750, 625 and 500 ml/ha showed synergistic activity and thrips population control was superior to market standard. The insecticide molecules applied in combination when applied solely showed lesser control of thrips like when Profenofos 50% EC @ 1000ml/ha recorded on 60.94%% reduction in the thrips population at the end of two sprays while Abamectin 1.9% EC @ 375ml/ha recorded 65.63% reduction. Though they are significantly controlling the thrips population the same molecules when applied in combination with lesser strength recorded higher control, to check synergy colby’s ratio was calculated and it recorded >1 in case of the combination Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC at all the doses i.e., 1.5 thereby proving combination insecticide is more reliable.
Table 3. Effect of Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC formulation on yield in Chilli.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Yield
(q/ha)
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC 500 31
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC 625 33
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC 750 35
Profenofos 50% EC 1000 21
Abamectin 1.9% EC 375 18
Spinetoram 11.7% SC 500 29
Fipronil 5% SC 1000 25
Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% + Fipronil 3.5% SC 750 22
Untreated check 12
The yield of cabbage recorded in different treatments as shown in the table above (Table 3.) implies that the combination molecule at the three doses positively affected the yield of the crop. The highest yield was recorded in Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 750 ml/ha with 35 q/ha, followed by Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 625 ml/ha with 33 q/ha and Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 500 ml/ha with 31 q/ha. While the individual molecules and market standards recorded yields ranging between 18-29 q/ha which were inferior to the yield recorded in the combination molecule treatments.
Table 4. Phytotoxicity of Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC formulation on Chilli
Treatments Days Visual Rating Scale
Yellowing Necrosis Wilting Vein
Clearing Leaf tip / Margin Dying Stunting / Dwarfing
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 750ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 625ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 500ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 50% EC @ 1000ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Abamectin 1.9% EC @ 375ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spinetoram 11.7% SC @ 500ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fipronil 5% SC @ 1000ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% + Fipronil 3.5% SC @ 750ml/ha
5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Untreated
5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
The phytotoxicity effect of the insecticide combination i.e., Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC on chilli crop was tested after 5 and 10 Days after spraying. The crop was checked for symptoms like yellowing, necrosis, wilting, vein clearing, leaf tip or leaf margin dying and stunting or dwarfing of plants. After thorough observations, it could be concluded that the crop did not show any symptoms of phytotoxicity. Therefore, the present insecticide combination can be considered a safe molecule.

Example – 2: Chilli - Mites
Table 5. Efficacy of first spray application of Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC formulation against Mites in Chilli.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of Nymphs or Adults per Plant (Days After Spraying) % Reduction in Pest Population
Pre 1 4 7 10 AVG
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC 500 17 6.8 0.8 1.8 3.8 6.04 88.12
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC 625 12.7 4 0 0 2 3.74 94.37
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC 750 15.2 3 0 0 0 3.64 96.74
Profenofos 50% EC 1000 15.12 12.76 14.32 19.34 21.34 16.58 45.45
Abamectin 1.9% EC 375 17.6 15 13 16.78 19.67 16.41 47.17
Cyenopyrafen 30% SC 300 15.3 12.34 9.7 8.5 11.2 11.41 64.61
Propargite 42% + Hexythiazox 2% EC 1250 19.52 6.42 9.728 13.12 14.92 12.75 65.11
Profenofos 40% + Fenpyroximate 2.50% EC 1000 11.82 7.72 4.72 7.72 11.72 8.74 74.18
Untreated check 18 23 29 33 39 28.40 0.00
The mites population before initiating the spraying was recorded in between 11.82-19.52 mites per plant in chilli. After the first application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC when applied at 625 ml/ha and 750 ml/ha showed maximum reduction in mites population of 4 and 3 mites/plant at 1 days after spraying and 0 mites/plant at 4, 7das and 2 mites/plant at 10 das when applied at 625ml/ha and 0 mites/plant at 4, 7 and 10 das. The average mites population after the entire spraying was recorded to be lowest in Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 625 ml/ha with 3.74 mites/plant followed by Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 750 ml/ha with 3.64 mites/plant which were performing superior to market standards by the end of first spray. The percent reduction in mites population recorded in all the treatments proved that Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC when applied at 750ml/ha was showing maximum reduction in mites population as 96.74% and at 625ml/ha recorded 94.37% there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the doses of 750, 625 ml/ha showed synergistic activity and mites population control was superior to market standard. Even the treatment Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC when applied at 500 ml/ha (lowest dose of the insecticide combination) also showed a percent reduction of 88.12% which was also superior to the market standard. Though the first spray application of combination insecticides showed significant reduction in mites population in chilli. While the same insecticides when applied alone at the end of first spraying Profenofos 50% EC @ 1000ml/ha recorded 45.45% reduction and Abamectin 1.9% EC @ 375 ml/ha recorded 47.17% reduction.
Table 6. Efficacy of second spray application of Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC formulation against Mites in Chilli.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of Nymphs or Adults per Plant (Days After Spraying) % Reduction in Pest Population Colby’ ratio
Pre 1 4 7 10 AVG
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC 500 3.8 1.80 0.00 0.58 2 1.64 97.59 1.48
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC 625 2 0.00 0.00 0 1 0.60 99.50 1.51
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC 750 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 100.00 1.52
Profenofos 50% EC 1000 21.34 20.00 14.00 21 29 21.07 54.18 0.82
Abamectin 1.9% EC 375 19.67 17.00 11.00 25 32 20.93 54.09 0.82
Cyenopyrafen 30% SC 300 11.2 13.00 14.00 17 24 15.84 63.08 0.96
Propargite 42% + Hexythiazox 2% EC 1250 14.928 14.00 18.00 21 24 18.39 58.07 0.88
Profenofos 40% + Fenpyroximate 2.50% EC 1000 11.72 9.50 12.34 17.89 25.67 15.42 64.84 0.99
Untreated check 39 41.00 44 47 50 44.20 0.00 0.00
The mites population before initiating the second spray was recorded in between 0-21.34 thrips per plant in chilli. This pre-treatment population, and the mites population recorded at the end of the first spraying. After the second application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC when applied at 750ml/ha showed maximum reduction in mites population by recording 0 thrips/plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 Days after spraying and when applied at 625ml/ha recorded 0 mites/plant at 1, 4, 7 days after spraying and 1 mites/plant at 10 days after spraying. The average mites population after the entire spraying was recorded to be lowest in Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 750 ml/ha with 0 mites/plant followed by Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 625 ml/ha with 0.60 mites/plant which were performing superior to market standards. The percent reduction in mites population recorded in all the treatments proved that Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC when applied at 750 ml/ha was showing maximum reduction in mites population as 100% followed by Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 625 ml/ha with 99.99% reduction and Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 500 ml/ha recorded 95.61% there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the doses of 750, 625 and 500 ml/ha showed synergistic activity and mites population control was superior to market standard. The insecticide molecules applied in combination when applied solely showed lesser control of mites like when Profenofos 50% EC @ 1000ml/ha recorded on 51.22%% reduction in the mites population at the end of two sprays while Abamectin 1.9% EC @ 375ml/ha recorded 58.54% reduction. Though they are significantly controlling the mites population the same molecules when applied in combination with lesser strength recorded higher control, to check synergy colby’s ratio was calculated and it recorded >1 i.e., 1.48-1.51 in case of the combination Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC at all the doses thereby proving combination insecticide is more reliable.
Table 7. Effect of Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC formulation on yield in Chilli.
Treatments Dose (g or ml / ha) Yield (q/ha)
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC 500 32.67
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC 625 34.5
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC 750 37.5
Profenofos 50% EC 1000 28.76
Abamectin 1.9% EC 375 24.43
Cyenopyrafen 30% SC 300 22.55
Propargite 42% + Hexythiazox 2% EC 1250 19.12
Profenofos 40% + Fenpyroximate 2.50% EC 1000 18.56
Untreated check 16
The yield of chilli recorded in different treatments as shown in the table above (Table 7.) implies that the combination molecule at the three doses positively affected the yield of the crop. The highest yield was recorded in Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 750 ml/ha with 37.5 q/ha, followed by Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 625 ml/ha with 34 q/ha and Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 500 ml/ha with 32.67 q/ha. While the individual molecules and market standards recorded yields ranging between 18.56-28.76 q/ha which were inferior to the yield recorded in the combination molecule treatments.
Table 8. Phytotoxicity of Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC formulation on Chilli
Treatments Days Visual Rating Scale
Yellowing Necrosis Wilting Vein
Clearing Leaf tip / Margin Dying Stunting / Dwarfing
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 750ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 625ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC @ 500ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 50% EC @ 1000ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Abamectin 1.9% EC @ 375ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cyenopyrafen 30% SC @ 300ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Propargite 42% + Hexythiazox 2% EC @ 1250ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 40% + Fenpyroximate 2.50% EC @ 1000ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Untreated check 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
The phytotoxicity effect of the insecticide combination i.e., Profenofos 44% + Abamectin 1% EC on chilli crop was tested after 5 and 10 Days after spraying. The crop was checked for symptoms like yellowing, necrosis, wilting, vein clearing, leaf tip or leaf margin dying and stunting or dwarfing of plants. After thorough observations, it could be concluded that the crop did not show any symptoms of phytotoxicity. Therefore, the present insecticide combination can be considered a safe molecule (Table 8).
Example – 3: Paddy Leaf Folder
Table 9. Efficacy of first spray application of Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC formulation against Leaf folder in Paddy.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of Nymphs or Adults per Plant (Days After Spraying) % Reduction in Pest Population
Pre 1 4 7 10 AVG
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 800 0.8 0.4 0 0.2 0.2 0.32 77.14
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 1000 0.8 0 0 0 0.2 0.2 85.71
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 1200 0.8 0 0 0 0 0.16 88.57
Profenofos 50% EC 1000 0.8 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.72 48.57
Tebufenozide 24% SC 800 0.8 0.7 0.4 0.8 1 0.74 47.14
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC 150 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.6 1 0.62 55.71
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.8 1.2 0.76 45.71
UNTREATED 0.8 0.9 1.3 1.6 2.4 1.4 0.00
The leaf folder population before initiating the spraying was recorded in between 0.7-0.8 larvae per plant in Paddy. After the first application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC when applied at 1200 ml/ha showed maximum reduction in leaf folder population of 0 larva/plant at 1, 4, 7 and 10 Days after spraying and Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 1000ml/ha recorded 0 larva/plant at 1,4,7 das and 0.2 larva/plant at 10 das. The average leaf folder population after the entire spraying was recorded to be lowest in Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 1200 ml/ha with 0.16 larva/plant followed by Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 1000 ml/ha with 0.2 larva/plant which were performing superior to market standards. The percent reduction in larval population recorded in all the treatments proved that Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC when applied at 1200 ml/ha was showing maximum reduction in larval population as 88.57% and at 1000 ml/ha recorded 85.17% there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the doses of 1200, 1000 ml/ha showed synergistic activity and leaf folder population control was superior to market standard. Even the treatment Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC when applied at 800 ml/ha (lowest dose of the insecticide combination) also showed a percent reduction of 77.14% which was also superior to the market standard.
Table 10. Efficacy of second spray application of Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC formulation against Leaf folder in Paddy.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of Nymphs or Adults per Plant (Days After Spraying) % Reduction in Pest Population Colby’s ratio
Pre 1 4 7 10 AVG
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 800 0.2 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.1 97.08 1.10
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 1000 0.2 0 0 0 0 0.04 98.83 1.12
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 1200 0 0 0 0 0 0 100.00 1.14
Profenofos 50% EC 1000 0.8 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.8 1.06 69.01 0.79
Tebufenozide 24% SC 800 1 0.8 1.2 1.7 2 1.34 60.82 0.69
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC 150 1 0.7 0.6 1.2 1.9 1.08 68.42 0.78
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 1.2 1 0.8 1.1 1.6 1.14 66.67 0.76
UNTREATED 2.4 2.6 3.4 4 4.7 3.42 0.00 0.00
The leaf folder population before initiating the second spray was recorded in between 0-1.2 larvae per plant in Paddy. This is the larval population recorded at the end of the first spraying. After the second application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC when applied at 1000 ml/ha and 1200ml/ha showed maximum reduction in leaf folder population by recording 0 larva/plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 Days after spraying and Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 800ml/ha recorded 0 larva/plant at 1, 4 das and 0.1 at 7 das and 0.2 at 10 das in the three combination treatments. The average leaf folder population after the entire spraying was recorded to be lowest in Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 1200 ml/ha with 0 larva/plant followed by Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 1000 ml/ha with 0.04 larva/plant which were performing superior to market standards. The percent reduction in larval population recorded in all the treatments proved that Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC when applied at 1200 ml/ha was showing maximum reduction in larval population as 100% followed by Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 1000 ml/ha with 98.83% reduction and Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 800 ml/ha recorded 97.08% there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the doses of 1200, 1000 and 800 ml/ha showed synergistic activity and leaf folder population control was superior to market standard. The insecticide molecules applied in combination when applied solely showed lesser control of leaf folder like when profenofos 50% EC @ 1000ml/ha recorded on 68.42% reduction in the larval population at the end of two sprays while Tebufenozide 24% SC @ 800ml/ha recorded 60.82% reduction. Though they are significantly controlling the larval population the same molecules when applied in combination with lesser strength recorded higher control in larval population and the colby’s ratio recorded in the three doses of Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC was also >1 i.e., 1.10-1.14 proving the synergistic interaction in the combination insecticide.
Table 11. Effect of Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC formulation on yield in Paddy.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Yield (q/ha)
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 800 45
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 1000 49
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 1200 52
Profenofos 50% EC 1000 43
Tebufenozide 24% SC 800 44
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC 150 42
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 40
UNTREATED 30
The yield of paddy recorded in different treatments as shown in the table above (Table 11.) implies that the combination molecule at the three doses positively affected the yield of the crop. The highest yield was recorded in Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 1200 ml/ha with 52q/ha, followed by Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 1000 ml/ha with 49 q/ha and Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 800 ml/ha with 45 q/ha. While the individual molecules and market standards recorded yields ranging between 30-44 q/ha which were inferior to the yield recorded in the combination molecule treatments
Table 12. Phytotoxicity of Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC on Paddy
Treatments Days Visual Rating Scale
Yellowing Necrosis Wilting Vein
Clearing Leaf tip / Margin Dying Stunting / Dwarfing
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 1200ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 1000ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 800ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 50% EC @ 1000ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tebufenozide 24% SC @ 800ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC @ 150ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC @ 150ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Untreated 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
The phytotoxicity effect of the insecticide combination i.e., Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC on paddy crop was tested after 5 and 10 Days after spraying. The crop was checked for symptoms like yellowing, necrosis, wilting, vein clearing, leaf tip or leaf margin dying and stunting or dwarfing of plants. After thorough observations, it could be concluded that the crop did not show any symptoms of phytotoxicity. Therefore, the present insecticide combination can be considered a safe molecule.

Example – 4: Fall Armyworm- Maize
Table 13. Efficacy of first spray application of Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC formulation against Fall armyworm in Maize.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of Nymphs or Adults per Plant
(Days After Spraying) % Reduction
in Pest Population
Pre 1 4 7 10 AVG
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 800 2.5 1.4 0.8 1.4 1.9 1.60 61.54
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 1000 3.1 1 0 0 0.2 0.86 79.33
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 1200 3.3 0 0 0 0 0.66 84.13
Profenofos 50% EC 1000 3.7 3 2.7 3.2 3.7 3.26 21.63
Tebufenozide 24% SC 800 2.9 2.7 3 3.4 3.8 3.16 24.04
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC 150 3.2 3.1 3.7 4 4.6 3.72 10.58
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 2.9 2.8 3.5 4.2 4.8 3.64 12.50
UNTREATED 3 3.6 4.3 4.7 5.2 4.16 0.00
The number of larvae in Maize before initiating the spraying was recorded in between 2.5-3.7 larva per plant in Maize. After the first application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC when applied at 1200 ml/ha recorded 0 larva/plant at 1 Days after spraying and 0 larva/plant at 4, 7, 10 Days after spraying and 1000 ml/ha recorded 1 larva/plant followed by 0 larva/plant at 4, 7 das and 0.2 larva/plant at 10das in both treatments. The average number of larvae per plant after the first spraying was recorded to be lowest in Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC@ 1200 ml/ha with 0.66 larvae/plant followed by Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC@ 1000 ml/ha with 0.86 larvae/plant which were performing superior to market standards. The percent reduction in larval population recorded in all the treatments proved that Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC when applied at 1200 ml/ha was showing maximum reduction as 84.13% and at 1000 ml/ha recorded 79.33% there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the doses of 1200, 1000 ml/ha showed synergistic activity and control larval population was superior to market standard. Even the treatment Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC when applied at 800 ml/ha (lowest dose of the insecticide combination) also showed a percent reduction of 61.54% which was also superior to the market standard. Though the first spray application of combination insecticides showed significant reduction in larval population in Maize.
Table 14. Efficacy of second spray application of Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC formulation against Fall armyworm in Maize.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of Nymphs or Adults per Plant
(Days After Spraying) % Reduction
in Pest Population Colby’s ratio
1 4 7 10 AVG
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 800 1.9 0 0 0 0.48 92.24 1.61
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 1000 0.2 0 0 0 0.05 99.18 1.73
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 1200 0 0 0 0 0.00 100.00 1.74
Profenofos 50% EC 1000 3.7 3.5 4 4.5 3.93 35.92 0.63
Tebufenozide 24% SC 800 3.8 3.5 4.2 4.8 4.08 33.47 0.58
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC 150 4.6 2.2 2.5 2.7 3.00 51.02 0.89
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 4.8 2 2.4 2.9 3.03 50.61 0.88
UNTREATED 5.2 5.4 6.5 7.4 6.13 0.00 0.00
The Fall armyworm population before initiating the second spray was recorded in between 0-4.8 larvae per plant in Maize. This population is nothing, but the larval population recorded at the end of the first spraying. After the second application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC when applied at 1200 ml/ha and 1000 ml/ha showed maximum reduction in larval population by recording 0 larvae/plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 Days after spraying in the combination treatments. The lowest dose of combination treatment i.e., Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 800ml/ ha recorded 1.9 larvae/ plant at 1 days after spraying and then 0 larvae/plant in 4, 7 and 10 days after spraying. The average larval population after the entire spraying was recorded to be lowest in Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC@ 1200 ml/ha and 1000 ml/ha with 0 and 0.05 larvae/plant followed by Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC@ 800 ml/ha with 0.48 larvae/plant which were performing superior to market standards. The percent reduction in larval population recorded in all the treatments proved that Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC when applied at 1200 ml/ha and 1000 ml/ha was showing maximum reduction in larval population as 100% and 99.18% followed by Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC@ 800 ml/ha with 92.24% reduction there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the doses of 1200, 1000 and 800 ml/ha showed synergistic activity and larval population control was superior to market standard. The insecticide molecules applied in combination when applied solely showed lesser control of larval population like when profenofos 50% EC @ 2000ml/ha recorded 35.92% reduction and Tebufenozide 25% SC @ 800 ml/ha recorded on 33.47% reduction in the larval population at the end of two sprays. Though they are significantly controlling the larval population the same molecules when applied in combination with lesser strength recorded higher control in larval population and colby’s ratio was >1 in all the three doses ie., 1.61-1.74 proving insecticides are highly synergistic in nature when applied as a combnation.
Table 15. Effect of Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC formulation on yield in Maize.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Yield (q/ha) % Cob Damage
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 800 12.33 4.5
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 1000 14.78 2.5
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 1200 17.54 0
Profenofos 50% EC 1000 10.45 9
Tebufenozide 24% SC 800 11.12 12
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC 150 8.11 24
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 8.78 28
UNTREATED 5.89 47
The production of healthy cobs and yield of Maize recorded in different treatments as shown in the table above (Table 15.) implies that the combination molecule at the three doses positively affected the yield of the crop and less damaged cobs was also superior. The highest yield was recorded in Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 1200 ml/ha with 17.54q/ha with 0.02% cob damage, followed by Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 1000 ml/ha with 14.78 q/ha with 2.5% cob damage and Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 800 ml/ha with 12.33 q/ha with 4.5% cob damage. While the individual molecules and market standards recorded yields ranging between 8.11-11.12 q/ha with pod damage percent ranging between 9%-28% which were inferior to the yield recorded in the combination molecule treatments.
Table 16. Phytotoxicity of Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC on Maize crop.
Treatments Days Visual Rating Scale
Yellowing Necrosis Wilting Vein
Clearing Leaf tip / Margin Dying Stunting / Dwarfing
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 1200ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 1000ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 800ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 50% EC @ 1000ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tebufenozide 24% SC @ 800ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC @ 150ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC @ 150ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Untreated
5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
The phytotoxicity effect of the insecticide combination i.e., Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC on Maize crop was tested after 5 and 10 Days after spraying. The crop was checked for symptoms like yellowing, necrosis, wilting, vein clearing, leaf tip or leaf margin dying and stunting or dwarfing of plants. After thorough observations, it could be concluded that the crop did not show any symptoms of phytotoxicity. Therefore, the present insecticide combination can be considered a safe molecule.

Example – 5: Tobacco Caterpillar- Soybean
Table 17. Efficacy of first spray application of Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC formulation against Tobacco caterpillar in Soybean.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of Nymphs or Adults per Plant
(Days After Spraying) % Reduction
in Pest Population
Pre 1 4 7 10 AVG
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% ECSC 800 2.5 0.5 0.4 0.1 1 0.90 75.68
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 1000 2.6 0.5 0 0 0 0.62 83.24
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 1200 2.4 0 0 0 0 0.48 87.03
Profenofos 50% EC 2000 2.5 2 2.3 2.8 3.3 2.58 30.27
Flubendiamide 38.39%SC 125 2.8 2.2 2.5 2.8 3 2.66 28.11
Emamectin Benzoate 5% SG 220 2.6 1.5 1.8 2 2.5 2.08 43.78
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 2.7 1.8 2.1 2.50 2.7 2.36 36.22
Untreated -- 2.8 3.4 3.8 4 4.5 3.70
The number of larvae in Soybean before initiating the spraying was recorded in between 2.4-2.8 larva per plant in Soybean. After the first application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC when applied at 1000 ml/ha recorded 0.2 larva/plant at 1 Days after spraying and 0 larva/plant at 4, 7, 10 Days after spraying and at 1200 ml/ha recorded 0 larva/plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 das in both treatments. The average number of larvae per plant after the first spraying was recorded to be lowest in Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC@ 1200 ml/ha with 0.48 larvae/plant followed by Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC@ 1000 ml/ha with 0.62 larvae/plant which were performing superior to market standards. The percent reduction in larval population recorded in all the treatments proved that Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC when applied at 1200 ml/ha was showing maximum reduction as 87.03% and at 1000 ml/ha recorded 83.24% there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the doses of 1200, 1000 ml/ha showed synergistic activity and control larval population was superior to market standard. Even the treatment Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC when applied at 800 ml/ha (lowest dose of the insecticide combination) also showed a percent reduction of 75.68% which was also superior to the market standard. Though the first spray application of combination insecticides showed significant reduction in larval population in Soybean.
Table 18. Efficacy of second spray application of Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC formulation against Tobacco caterpillar in Soybean.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of Nymphs or Adults per Plant
(Days After Spraying) % Reduction
in Pest Population Colby’s ratio
Pre 1 4 7 10 AVG
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 800 1 0.4 0 0.2 0.5 0.42 91.33 1.72
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 1000 0 0 0 0 0.2 0.04 99.17 1.87
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 1200 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 100.00 1.88
Profenofos 50% EC 2000 3.3 3 3.2 3.6 4 3.42 29.43 0.55
Flubendiamide 38.39%SC 125 3 2.4 2.8 3.6 4.3 3.22 33.55 0.63
Emamectin Benzoate 5% SG 220 2.5 1.8 2 2.6 3 2.38 50.89 0.96
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 2.7 2 2.2 2.5 2.9 2.46 49.24 0.93
Untreated -- 4.5 4.7 4.9 5 5.13 4.85 0.00
The Tobacco caterpillar population before initiating the second spray was recorded in between 0-3.3 larvae per plant in Soybean. This population is nothing, but the larval population recorded at the end of the first spraying. After the second application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC when applied at 1200 ml/ha and 1000 ml/ha showed maximum reduction in larval population by recording 0 larvae/plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 Days after spraying in the combination treatments. The lowest dose of combination treatment i.e., Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 800ml/ ha recorded 0.4 larvae/ plant at 1 days after spraying and then 0 larvae/plant in 4 das, 0.2 larva/plant 7 das and 0.5 larva/plant at 10 days after spraying. The average larval population after the entire spraying was recorded to be lowest in Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC@ 1200 ml/ha and 1000 ml/ha with 0 and 0.04 larvae/plant followed by Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC@ 800 ml/ha with 0.42 larvae/plant which were performing superior to market standards. The percent reduction in larval population recorded in all the treatments proved that Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC when applied at 1200 ml/ha and 1000 ml/ha was showing maximum reduction in larval population as 100% and 99.17% followed by Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC@ 800 ml/ha with 91.33% reduction there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the doses of 1200, 1000 and 800 ml/ha showed synergistic activity and larval population control was superior to market standard. The insecticide molecules applied in combination when applied solely showed lesser control of larval population like when profenofos 50% EC @ 2000ml/ha recorded 29.43% and Tebufenozide 25% SC @ 800 ml/ha recorded on 50.89% reduction in the larval population at the end of two sprays. Though they are significantly controlling the larval population the same molecules when applied in combination with lesser strength recorded higher control in larval population and colby’s ratio recorded in all three combinations as >1 i.e., 1.72-1.88 proving combination insecticide is highly synergistic in nature.
Table 19. Effect of Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC formulation on yield in Soybean.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Yield (q/ha) % Pod Damage
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 800 19.21 9.54
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 1000 21.33 2
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC 1200 25.64 0.1
Profenofos 50% EC 2000 14.78 34
Flubendiamide 38.39%SC 125 12.66 38
Emamectin Benzoate 5% SG 220 11.37 44
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 10.98 47
Untreated -- 7.65 65
The production of healthy damage free pods and pod yield of Soybean recorded in different treatments as shown in the table above (Table 19.) implies that the combination molecule at the three doses positively affected the yield of the crop and the quality of pods was also superior. The highest yield was recorded in Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 1200 ml/ha with 25.64q/ha with 0.1% pod damage, followed by Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 1000 ml/ha with 21.33 q/ha with 2% pod damage and Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC @ 800 ml/ha with 19.21 q/ha with 9.54% pod damage. While the individual molecules and market standards recorded yields ranging between 10.98-14.78 q/ha with pod damage percent ranging between 47%-34% which were inferior to the yield recorded in the combination molecule treatments.
Table 20. Phytotoxicity of Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% ECformulation on Soybean crop.
Treatments Days Visual Rating Scale
Yellowing Necrosis Wilting Vein
Clearing Leaf tip / Margin Dying Stunting / Dwarfing
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC@ 800ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC@ 1000ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC@ 1200ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 50% EC @ 2000ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Flubendiamide 38.39% SC @ 125ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Emamectin Benzoate 5% SG @ 220ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC @ 150ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Untreated 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
The phytotoxicity effect of the insecticide combination i.e., Profenofos 40% + Tebufenozide 11% EC on Soybean crop was tested after 5 and 10 Days after spraying. The crop was checked for symptoms like yellowing, necrosis, wilting, vein clearing, leaf tip or leaf margin dying and stunting or dwarfing of plants. After thorough observations, it could be concluded that the crop did not show any symptoms of phytotoxicity. Therefore, the present insecticide combination can be considered a safe molecule.
It is to be understood that this disclosure is not limited to a particular compositions or specific constituents, which can, of course, vary and that the terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing embodiments only and is not intended to be limiting the scope of the invention. As used in this specification and the appended claims, the singular forms "a," "an," and "the" include plural referents unless the content clearly dictates otherwise, and equivalents thereof known to those skilled in the art and so forth.
Unless defined otherwise, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by those skilled in the art to which this disclosure pertains. Although any methods and materials similar or equivalent to those described herein can be used in the practice for testing of the disclosure(s), specific examples of appropriate materials and methods are described herein. The examples set forth above are provided to give those of ordinarily skilled in the art a complete description of how to make and use the embodiments of the particular compositions or specific constituents, methods of practice, and are not intended to limit the scope of what the inventors regard as their invention. Modifications of the above-described modes for carrying out the invention that is obvious to persons skilled in the art are intended to be within the scope of the following claims. All patents and publications mentioned in the specification are indicative of the levels of skill of those skilled in the art to which the disclosure pertains.
While specific embodiments of the present invention are explicitly disclosed herein, the above specification and examples herein are illustrative and not restrictive. It will be understood that various modifications may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. Many variations of the disclosure will become apparent to those skilled in the art upon review of this specification and the embodiments below. The full scope of the invention should be determined by reference to the embodiments, along with their full scope of equivalents and the specification, along with such variations. Accordingly, other embodiments are within the scope of the following claims. ,CLAIMS:CLAIMS:
We Claim:
1. A synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
(a) at least one organophosphate insecticide;
(b) at least one insecticide selected from diacyl hydrazine
insecticide and / or macrocyclic lactone insecticide; and
(c) at least one agrochemical acceptable excipient.
2. The composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the organophosphate insecticide is selected from the group comprising but not limited to azothoate, bromophos, chlorthiophos, cyanophos, cythioate, dicapthon, dichlofenthion, etaphos, famphur, fenchlorphos, fenitrothion, fensulfothion, fenthion, heterophos, jodfenphos, mesulfenfos, parathion, phosnichlor, profenofos, prothiofos, sulprofos, temephos, trichlormetaphos-3, trifenofos, and xiaochongliulin.
3. The composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein diacyl hydrazine insecticides is selected from the group comprising but not limited to chromafenozide, fufenozide, halofenozide, methoxy fenozide, tebufenozide, and yishijing.
4. The composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein macrocyclic lactone insecticides is selected from the group comprising but not limited to abamectin, doramectin, emamectin, eprinomectin, ivermectin, and selamectin.
5. The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein profenofos and tebufenozide are formulated in emulsifiable concentrate (EC) and present in the weight ratio of (1-50):(1-20).
6. The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein profenofos and tebufenozide are formulated in oil dispersion (OD) and present in the weight ratio of (1-50):(1-20).
7. The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein profenofos and abamectin are formulated in emulsifiable concentrate (EC) and present in the weight ratio of (1-50):(1-10).
8. The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein the insecticidal composition is used for prophylactic application, destroy and/or control the pests applying effective amount of insecticidal composition over the target areas by conventional methods by for preventive and curative action.
9. The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein the insecticidal composition is used for destroying and / or control the pests in rice, wheat, fruits, roots, tubers, vegetables, maize, grains, sugarcane, cereals, field crops and various other crops for general pest control.