DESC:Synergistic Insecticidal Combinations Comprising Tebufenozide
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising the combination of diacyl hydrazine insecticide with one or more insecticide(s) 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 tebufenozide with one or more insecticide(s) selected from chlorantraniliprole and emamectin 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 diacyl hydrazine insecticides with one or more insecticide(s) selected from diamide insecticide and / or macrocyclic lactone with at least one or more agrochemical acceptable excipients.
In an aspect of the present invention provides an insecticidal composition comprising diacyl hydrazine insecticides with one or more insecticide(s) selected from diamide insecticide and / or macrocyclic lactone 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 the present invention, the insecticidal composition can be applied as a foliar spray, soil drenching, seed dressing, and other application to the targeted crops, plants, and trees.
In an embodiment of the present invention the formulation excipients or inactive excipients are used in suspension concentrates (SC) formulation are selected from carrier, dispersing agent, surfactant, anti-freezing agent, anti-foaming agent, 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 have same meaning “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, humans 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 diacyl hydrazine insecticides with one or more insecticide(s) selected from diamide insecticide and / or macrocyclic lactone optionally with at least one agrochemical acceptable excipient(s) in different formulation and percentages have astonishing effects of controlling insects and also 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 tebufenozide and one or more insecticide(s) selected from chlorantraniliprole and / or emamectin purpose thereof. The synergy of insecticide composition has the main effective components of tebufenozide with chlorantraniliprole and / or emamectin acts by mimic the action of the molting hormone ecdysone in insects and cause paralysis, activates ryanodine receptors which release of internal cellular calcium which leads to Ca2+ depletion, feeding cessation 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.
According to current practice, formulations of tebufenozide with one or more insecticide selected from chlorantraniliprole and / or emamectin 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, preventive and systemic 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 tebufenozide with chlorantraniliprole and/or emamectin that are used together in suspension concentrates (SC) 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 products and achieve the successful results, which were not possible to obtain previously with any insecticide or combination.
The present invention involves the mixture of two active ingredients which are classified under diacyl hydrazine insecticides with one or more insecticide(s) selected from diamide insecticide and / or macrocyclic lactone insecticide are described herein thereof.
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.
Diamide insecticide is a kind of pesticide that specifically targets the ryanodine receptor of Lepidopteran pests, which makes it safe, effective, targeted, and low toxicity to mammals. So, it is one of the most concerned and fastest-growing pesticide. The specific diamide insecticide is anthranilic diamide insecticide, is a ryanodine receptor activator and has a role as a ryanodine receptor agonist. Anthranilic diamides potently activate ryanodine receptor, releasing stored calcium from the sarcoendoplasmic reticulum causing impaired regulation of muscle contraction.
Chlorantraniliprole is the first commercially available anthranilic diamide insecticide that targets ryanodine receptors having IUPAC name: 5-bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6-(methyl carbamoyl) phenyl]-2-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)pyrazole-3-carboxamide is contact, selective and curative insecticide which exhibits excellent differential selectivity for insect ryanodine receptors over mammalian ryanodine receptors. The ryanodine receptor is a ligand-gated calcium channel found in neuromuscular cells of insects. The activation of the ryanodine receptors precipitates an uncontrolled release of internal cellular calcium which leads to Ca2+ depletion, feeding cessation and results in uncontrolled muscle contraction, lethargy, paralysis and feeding cessation followed by the death of target organisms.
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 are derived from the soil bacterium Streptomyces avermitillus and are 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.
Emamectin is a 16-membered macrocyclic lactone produced by the fermentation of the soil actinomycete Streptomyces avermitilis. Emamectin exhibits stomach toxicity, contact poisoning and strong penetrating action in target pests, exhibits low toxicity and low residue. Emamectin has the effect of enhancing neuronal activity such as glutamate and gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) which inhibits muscle contraction, causing a continuous flow of chlorine ions in the GABA and H-Glutamate receptor sites, thereby large amounts of chloride ions are enter into nerve cells, causing loss of cell function, disrupting nerve conduction, and allowing larvae to stop feeding immediately after contact, with irreversible paralysis, and maximal lethality within 3-4 days, when applied to target pests.
The first embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
at least one diacyl hydrazine insecticide; and
at least one insecticide selected from diamide insecticide and / or macrocyclic lactone insecticide.
The first aspect of the first embodiment, the diacyl hydrazine insecticide, is selected from the group comprising but not limited to chromafenozide, fufenozide, halofenozide, methoxy fenozide, tebufenozide, and yishijing.
The second aspect of the first embodiment, the diamide insecticide is selected from the group comprising but not limited to chlorantraniliprole, cyantraniliprole, cyhalodiamide, cyclaniliprole, flubendiamide, fluchlordiniliprole, pioxaniliprole, tetrachlorantraniliprole, tetraniliprole, tiorantraniliprole.
The third aspect of the first embodiment, the macrocyclic lactone insecticide, is 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 diacyl hydrazine insecticides with one or more insecticide(s) selected from diamide insecticide and / or macrocyclic lactone insecticide; wherein diacyl hydrazine insecticides 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 diacyl hydrazine insecticide;
at least one insecticide selected from diamide insecticide and / or macrocyclic lactone insecticide; and
at least one agrochemical acceptable excipient.
The first aspect of the second embodiment, the diacyl hydrazine insecticide, is selected from the group comprising but not limited to chromafenozide, fufenozide, halofenozide, methoxy fenozide, tebufenozide, and yishijing.
The second aspect of the second embodiment, the diamide insecticide is selected from the group comprising but not limited to chlorantraniliprole, cyantraniliprole, cyhalodiamide, cyclaniliprole, flubendiamide, fluchlordiniliprole, pioxaniliprole, tetrachlorantraniliprole, tetraniliprole, tiorantraniliprole.
The third aspect of the second embodiment, the macrocyclic lactone insecticide is selected from the group comprising but not limited to avermectin insecticides like abamectin, doramectin, emamectin, eprinomectin, ivermectin, and selamectin.
The fourth aspect of the second embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of diacyl hydrazine insecticides with one or more insecticide(s) selected from diamide insecticide and / or macrocyclic lactone insecticide; wherein diacyl hydrazine insecticides and second insecticide are present in the weight ratio of (1-80):(1-80); preferably in the weight 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, nonionic 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 nonionic 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(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 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, 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 are 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:
at least one diacyl hydrazine insecticide;
at least one insecticide selected from diamide insecticide and / or macrocyclic lactone insecticide;
carrier;
wetting agent;
anti-freezing agent;
antifoaming agent;
dispersing agent; and
adjuvant.
The first aspect of the third embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of diacyl hydrazine insecticides with one or more insecticide(s) selected from diamide insecticide and / or macrocyclic lactone insecticide; wherein diacyl hydrazine insecticides and second insecticide are present in the weight ratio of (1-80):(1-80); preferably in the weight ratio of (1-60):(1-20).
The second aspect of the third embodiment, agriculturally acceptable excipient selected from but not limited to carrier, wetting agent, anti-freezing agent, antifoaming 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 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 water.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, surfactant includes wetting agent and emulsifier.
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; preferably block co-polymer.
Further aspect of the third 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 third 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, and other commercially available dispersing agents; preferably comb polymer.
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.
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; preferably polysaccharides.
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 are 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; preferably benzisothiazolin-3-one (BIT).
The fourth embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
tebufenozide;
at least one insecticide selected from chlorantraniliprole and / or emamectin;
water;
block co-polymer;
propylene glycol;
siloxane poly alkylene oxide;
comb polymer;
polysaccharides; and
benzisothiazolin-3-one (BIT).
First aspect of the fourth embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of tebufenozide with chlorantraniliprole and / or emamectin; wherein tebufenozide with chlorantraniliprole and / or emamectin are present in the weight ratio of (1-80):(1-80); preferably in the ratio of (1-60):(1-20).
Further aspect of the fourth embodiment, the composition of fourth embodiment is formulated as suspension concentrates (SC).
The fifth embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
tebufenozide; and
chlorantraniliprole.
First aspect of the fifth embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of tebufenozide and chlorantraniliprole; wherein tebufenozide and chlorantraniliprole 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 fifth embodiment, the composition of the fifth embodiment comprising at least one agrochemical acceptable excipient thereof which is / are used in preparation desired formulation.
Further aspect of the fifth embodiment, the composition of fifth embodiment is formulated as suspension concentrates (SC).
The sixth embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
tebufenozide; and
emamectin.
First aspect of the sixth embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of tebufenozide and emamectin; wherein tebufenozide and emamectin are present in the weight ratio of (1-80):(1-80); preferably in the ratio of (1-40):(1-10).
The second aspect of the sixth embodiment, the composition of the sixth embodiment comprising at least one agrochemical acceptable excipient thereof which is / are used in preparation desired formulation.
Further aspect of the sixth embodiment, the composition of sixth embodiment is formulated as suspension concentrates (SC).
Another embodiment of the present invention provides a process for the preparation of an insecticidal suspension concentrates formulation comprising:
add water into premix vessel with continuous stirring;
add anti freezing, anti-bacterial agent and antifoaming agent to the above vessel under continuous stirring;
add tebufenozide with chlorantraniliprole and / or emamectin to the above slurry and stirred for 30-60 minutes to get homogenous mixture;
after mixing the above material, optionally mill or grind to get the desired particle size of minimum 99% by passing through 500 bss by wet sieving method and remove any oversized particles or agglomerate;
the obtained wet milled slurry particles with size d50 <5-micron material, then transfer into the blender and add thickener 2% gum solution to get desired viscosity; and
mix well until a homogenous mixture is obtained, 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 invention 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 also 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: SUSPENSION CONCENTRATES (SC) FORMULATION OF SYNERGISTIC INSECTICIDAL COMPOSITION OF THE PRESENT INVENTION:
TABLE 1.1:
S. No Ingredient Weight / Weight %
1 Tebufenozide 39.5
2 Chlorantraniliprole 10.5
3 Block co-polymer 2.5
4 Propylene glycol 5
5 Comb polymer 2.5
6 Polysaccharides 0.3
7 Benzisothiazolin-3-one 0.1
8 Siloxane poly alkylene oxide 0.5
9 Water QS
Total 100
Table 1.2
S. No Ingredient Weight / Weight %
1 Tebufenozide 24
2 Emamectin 1.5
3 Block co-polymer 2.5
4 Propylene glycol 5
5 Comb polymer 2.5
6 Polysaccharides 0.3
7 Benzisothiazolin-3-one 0.1
8 Siloxane poly alkylene oxide 0.5
9 Water QS
Total 100
EXAMPLE 2: BIO EFFICACY AND PHYTOTOXICITY TESTS OF THE PRESENT INVENTION
Methodology:
Presently to evaluate the efficacy of novel tebufenozide combinations against different pests on different crops. The tebufenozide combinations i.e. tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC and tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC formulations were evaluated against different pests on different crops and to test their phytotoxicity on the crop after two sprayings have been conducted. Both, tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC and tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC formulations were evaluated against leaf folder in paddy, fall armyworm in maize and tobacco caterpillar in soybean crop. 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., Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC (600ml/ha 750ml/ha and 900ml/ha) formulation, Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC (300ml/ha, 250ml/ha and 200ml/ha) formulation, the market standards were used for leaf folder in paddy, fall armyworm in maize and tobacco caterpillar in soybean to compare the efficacies (Table 1.). 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.
Methods of Observations:
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., Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 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,
Paddy– Leaf Folder (Cnaphalocrocis medinalis)
Maize – Fall Armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda)
Soybean – Tobacco Caterpillar (Spodoptera litura)
Table 1. Treatment Details
Treatment Number Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha)
T1 Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 600
T2 Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 750
T3 Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 900
T4 Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 300
T5 Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 250
T6 Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 200
T7 Tebufenozide 24% SC 800
T8 Emamectin Benzoate 4% SG 220
T9 Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150
T10 Flubendiamide 39.35% SC 150
T11 Indoxacarb 14.5% SC 200
T12 UNTREATED
Example – 1: Paddy Leaf Folder
Table 2. Efficacy of first spray application of Tebufenozide combinations against Leaf Folder in Paddy.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of Larva per Plant
(Days After Spraying) % Reduction in Larval
Population
Pre 1 4 7 10 AVG
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 600 0.8 0.4 0 0.2 0.2 0.32 77.14
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 750 0.8 0 0 0 0.2 0.2 85.71
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 900 0.8 0 0 0 0 0.16 88.57
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 300 0.7 0.5 0 0 0.3 0.3 78.57
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 250 0.9 0.2 0 0 0 0.22 84.29
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 200 0.8 0 0 0 0 0.16 88.57
Tebufenozide 24% SC 800 0.9 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.74 47.14
Emamectin Benzoate 4% SG 220 1 0.7 0.4 0.8 1 0.78 44.29
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.6 1 0.62 55.71
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC 150 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.8 1.2 0.76 45.71
Indoxacarb 14.5% SC 200 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.7 1 0.7 50.00
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 0.7-1 larvae per plant in Paddy. After the first application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 ml/ha showed maximum reduction in leaf folder population of 0 larva/plant at 1, 4, 7 and 10 Days after spraying and Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750 ml/ha recorded 0 larva/plant at 1,4,7 das and 0.2 larva/plant at 10 das and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250 ml/ha recorded 0.2 larva/plant at 1 das and 0 larva/plant at 4, 7, 10 das. The average leaf folder population after the entire spraying was recorded to be lowest in Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 ml/ha with 0.16 larva/plant followed by Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750 ml/ha and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250 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 Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 ml/ha were showing maximum reduction in larval population as 88.57% and Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750 ml/ha and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250 ml/ha recorded 85.71%, 84.21% reduction there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the high, medium doses showed synergistic activity and leaf folder population control was superior to market standard. Even the treatment Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 600 ml/ha and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 200 ml/ha (lowest dose of the insecticide combination) also showed a percent reduction of 77.14% and 78.57% respectively which were also superior to the market standard. Thought the solo molecules recorded far lower percent reduction in larval population viz., Tebufenozide 24% SC (47.14%), Emamectin Benzoate 4% SG (44.29%) and Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC (55.71%). As the lowest doses of the respective combinations achieved <80% control/reduction in larval population at end of first spray another spraying has been taken up.
Table 3. Efficacy of second spray application of Tebufenozide combinations against Leaf folder in Paddy.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of Larva per Plant
(Days After Spraying) % Reduction in Larval
Population Colby’s Ratio
Pre 1 4 7 10 AVG
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 600 0.2 0 0 0.3 0.7 0.24 92.98 1.07
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 750 0.2 0 0 0 0 0.04 98.83 1.14
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 900 0 0 0 0 0 0 100.00 1.16
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 300 0.3 0 0 0.2 0.5 0.2 94.15 1.10
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 250 0 0 0 0 0 0 100.00 1.16
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 100.00 1.16
Tebufenozide 24% SC 800 0.8 0.6 1 1.3 1.7 1.08 68.42 0.80
Emamectin Benzoate 4% SG 220 1 0.8 1.4 1.8 2.3 1.46 57.31 0.67
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 1 0.7 1.3 2 2.6 1.52 55.56 0.65
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC 150 1.2 1 0.8 1 1.1 1.02 70.18 0.82
Indoxacarb 14.5% SC 200 1.8 1.7 1 1.1 1.2 1.36 60.23 0.70
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 0-1.8 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 Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 and 250 ml/ha showed maximum reduction in leaf folder population by recording 0 larva/plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 Days after spraying with 100% reduction in Larval population after first spray itself and Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750 ml/ha recorded 0.2, 0, 0, 0 larva/plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 das in the combination treatments. The average leaf folder population after the entire spraying was recorded to be lowest in Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300, 250 ml/ha with 0 larva/plant followed by Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750 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 Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300, 250 ml/ha was showing maximum reduction in larval population as 100% followed by Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750 ml/ha with 98.83% reduction and Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 600 ml/ha and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 200 ml/ha recorded 92.98%, 94.15% there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the high, medium and low doses 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 Tebufenozide 24% SC recorded on 68.42% reduction in the larval population at the end of two sprays while Emamectin Benzoate 4% SG recorded 57.31% reduction and Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC recorded 55.56% 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 Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC i.e., 1.07, 1.14, 1.16 and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC i.e., 1.10, 1.16, 1.16 were also >1 proving the synergistic interaction in the combination insecticide.
Table 4. Effect of Tebufenozide combinations on yield in Paddy.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Yield
(q/ha)
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 600 45
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 750 51
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 900 53
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 200 48
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 250 49
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 300 50
Tebufenozide 24% SC 800 40
Emamectin Benzoate 4% SG 220 39
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 41
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC 150 43
Indoxacarb 14.5% SC 200 44
UNTREATED 30
The yield of paddy recorded in different treatments as shown in the table above (Table 4.) implies that the combination molecule at the three doses in both types of tebufenozide combinations positively affected the yield of the crop. The highest yield was recorded in Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 ml/ha with 53q/ha, followed by Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250 ml/ha with 51 q/ha, Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha with 50 q/ha and Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750 ml/ha with 49 q/ha and Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 600 ml/ha with 48 q/ha, Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 200 ml/ha with 45 q/ha. While the individual molecules and market standards recorded yields ranging between 39-44 q/ha which were inferior to the yield recorded in the combination molecule treatments
Table 5. Phytotoxicity of Tebufenozide combinations on Paddy
Treatments Days Visual Rating Scale
Yellowing Necrosis Wilting Vein
Clearing Leaf tip / Margin Dying Stunting / Dwarfing
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 600ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 200ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @300ml/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
Emamectin Benzoate 4% SG @ 220g/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
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC @ 150ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Indoxacarb 14.5% SC @ 200ml/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 Tebufenozide combinations 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 – 2: Fall Armyworm- Maize
Table 6. Efficacy of first spray application of Tebufenozide combinations against Fall armyworm in Maize.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of Larva per Plant
(Days After Spraying) % Reduction in Larval
Population
Pre 1 4 7 10 AVG
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 600 3 1 0.4 0.5 0.7 1.12 70.37
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 750 3.2 0.8 0 0 0 0.8 78.84
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 900 3.2 0 0 0 0 0.64 83.07
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 300 3.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.24 67.20
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 250 3.4 1 0 0 0 0.88 76.72
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 200 3.1 0 0 0 0 0.62 83.60
Tebufenozide 24% SC 800 3 2 2.1 2.4 2.4 2.38 37.04
Emamectin Benzoate 4% SG 220 3.2 2.1 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.52 33.33
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 3.2 2.5 1.8 2 2.5 2.4 36.51
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC 150 3.5 0.9 1 1.3 1.5 1.64 56.61
Indoxacarb 14.5% SC 200 3.3 1 1.6 2 2.5 2.08 44.97
UNTREATED 3.5 3.6 3.8 3.9 4.1 3.78 0.00
The number of larvae in Maize before initiating the spraying was recorded in between 3-3.5 larva per plant in Maize. After the first application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 ml/ha recorded 0 larva/plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 Days after spraying and Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750 ml/ha recorded 1, 0, 0, 0 larva/plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 das and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250 ml/ha recorded 0.8, 0, 0, 0 larva/plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 das in the treatments. The average number of larvae per plant after the first spraying was recorded to be lowest in Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha with 0.64 larva/plant and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 ml/ha with 0.62 larvae/plant followed by Tebufenozide24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750 ml/ha with 0.8 larva/plant and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250 ml/ha with 0.88 larvae/plant which were performing superior to market standards. The percent reduction in larval population recorded in all the treatments proved that Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 ml/ha were showing maximum reduction as 83.07% and 83.60% and Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750 ml/ha recorded 78.84% reduction and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250 ml/ha recorded 76.72% there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at high, medium, low doses showed synergistic activity and control larval population was superior to market standard. Even the treatment Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 600 ml/ha recorded 70.37% reduction and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 200 ml/ha recorded 67.20% (lowest dose of the insecticide combination) which were superior to the market standard.

Table 7. Efficacy of second spray application of Tebufenozide combination against Fall armyworm in Maize.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of Larva per Plant
(Days After Spraying) % Reduction in Larval
Population Colby’s Ratio
1 4 7 10 AVG
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 600 0.5 0 0.1 0.4 0.25 94.59 1.35
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 750 0 0 0 0.2 0.05 98.92 1.41
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 900 0 0 0 0 0 100.00 1.43
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 300 0.7 0 0.1 0.3 0.6 87.03 1.16
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 250 0 0 0.2 0.5 0.175 96.22 1.28
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 200 0 0 0 0 0 100.00 1.33
Tebufenozide 24% SC 800 2.1 2 2.2 2.5 2.9 37.30 0.50
Emamectin Benzoate 4% SG 220 2.3 2 2.1 2.4 2.2 52.43 0.70
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 2.4 0.3 0.6 0.5 0.95 79.46 0.90
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC 150 1.4 0 1.4 1.8 1.15 75.14 0.90
Indoxacarb 14.5% SC 200 2.2 1 1.2 1.3 1.5 67.57 0.90
UNTREATED 4.3 4.5 4.7 5 4.625 0.00 0.00
The Fall armyworm population after the second application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 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 average larval population after the entire spraying was recorded to be lowest in Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 ml/ha with 0 larvae/plant followed by Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750 ml/ha with 0.05 larva/plant and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250 ml/ha with 0.18 larvae/plant which were performing superior to market standards. The percent reduction in larval population recorded in all the treatments proved that Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 ml/ha were showing maximum reduction in larval population as 100% followed by Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750 ml/ha and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250 ml/ha with 98.92%, 96.22% reduction there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the high, medium, low doses 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 Tebufenozide 24% SC recorded 37.30% reduction, Emamectin Benzoate 4% SG recorded 52.43% reduction and Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC recorded on 79.46% 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 of two combinationa i.e., Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC (1.35, 1.41, 1.43) and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC (1.16, 1.28, 1.33) proving insecticides are highly synergistic in nature when applied as a combination.
Table 8. Effect of Tebufenozide combinations on yield in Maize.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Yield (q/ha) % Cob Damage
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 600 12 3.12
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 750 15 1.65
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 900 17 0.03
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 300 13 5.43
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 250 14 3.44
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 200 15 1.78
Tebufenozide 24% SC 800 9 15.67
Emamectin Benzoate 4% SG 220 8 21.45
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 8.2 23.66
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC 150 10 10.43
Indoxacarb 14.5% SC 200 11 13.44
UNTREATED 7 28
The production of healthy cobs and yield of Maize recorded in different treatments as shown in the table above (Table 8.) 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 Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 ml/ha with 17q/ha with 0.03% cob damage, followed by Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250 ml/ha with 15 q/ha with 1.78%, 1.65% cob damage followed by Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 740 ml/ha with 14 q/ha with 3.44% cob damage, Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 600 ml/ha with 13 q/ha with 5.43% cob damage, Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 200 ml/ha with 12 q/ha with 3.12% cob damage. While the individual molecules and market standards recorded yields ranging between 9-11 q/ha with cob damage percent ranging between 10.43%-23.66% which were inferior to the yield recorded in the combination molecule treatments.
Table 9. Phytotoxicity of Tebufenozide combinations on Maize crop.
Treatments Days Visual Rating Scale
Yellowing Necrosis Wilting Vein
Clearing Leaf tip / Margin Dying Stunting / Dwarfing
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 600ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 200ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @300ml/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
Emamectin Benzoate 4% SG @ 220g/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
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC @ 150ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Indoxacarb 14.5% SC @ 200ml/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 Tebufenozide combinations 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 10. Efficacy of first spray application of Tebufenozide combinations against Tobacco caterpillar in Soybean.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of Larva per Plant
(Days After Spraying) % Reduction in Larval
Population
Pre 1 4 7 10 AVG
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 600 2.6 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.76 77.38
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 750 2.6 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.60 82.14
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 900 2.4 0 0 0 0 0.48 85.71
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 300 2.4 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.88 73.81
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 250 2.5 0.4 0 0 0.3 0.64 80.95
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 200 2.5 0 0 0 0 0.50 85.12
Tebufenozide 24% SC 800 2.4 1.5 1.8 2 2.2 1.98 41.07
Emamectin Benzoate 4% SG 220 2.7 1 1.1 1.8 2 1.72 48.81
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 2.6 1.2 1.8 2 2.3 1.98 41.07
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC 150 2.6 0.3 0.5 0.9 1.2 1.10 67.26
Indoxacarb 14.5% SC 200 2.5 0.5 0.7 1 1.1 1.16 65.48
UNTREATED 2.7 3 3.4 3.7 4 3.36 0.00
The number of larvae in Soybean before initiating the spraying was recorded in between 2.4-2.7 larva per plant in Soybean. After the first application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha with 0 larva/plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 das and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 ml/ha recorded 0 larva/plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 Days after spraying and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250 ml/ha recorded 0.4 larva/plant at 1 das, 0 larva/plant 4, 7 das and 0.3 larva/plant at 10 das followed by Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750 ml/ha with 0.2 larva/plant at 1das, 0 larva/plant at 4, 7 das and 0.2 larva/plant at 10 das. The average number of larvae per plant after the first spraying was recorded to be lowest in Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha with 0.48 larva/plant and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 ml/ha with 0.50 larvae/plant followed by Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 7500 ml/ha with 0.60 larva/plant and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250 ml/ha with 0.64 larvae/plant which were performing superior to market standards. The percent reduction in larval population recorded in all the treatments proved that Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha with and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 ml/ha were showing maximum reduction as 85.71% and 85.12% and Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750 ml/ha with 82.14% reduction and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250 ml/ha recorded 80.95% there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the high, medium, low doses showed synergistic activity and control larval population was superior to market standard. Even the treatment Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 600 ml/ha (77.38% reduction) and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 200 ml/ha (73.81% reduction) (lowest dose of the insecticide combination) which were superior to the market standard.

Table 11. Efficacy of second spray application of Tebufenozide combinations against Tobacco caterpillar in Soybean.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of Larva per Plant
(Days After Spraying) % Reduction in Larval
Population Colby’s Ratio
1 4 7 10 AVG
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 600 0.5 0.3 0 0.1 0.23 95.14 1.16
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 750 0.1 0 0 0.3 0.10 97.84 1.20
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 900 0 0 0 0 0.00 100.00 1.22
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 300 0.5 0.1 0 0.3 0.23 95.14 1.17
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 250 0.3 0 0 0.4 0.18 96.22 1.19
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 200 0 0 0 0.1 0.03 99.46 1.23
Tebufenozide 24% SC 800 2.1 2 1.8 2 1.98 57.30 0.71
Emamectin Benzoate 4% SG 220 1.9 1.7 2 2.3 1.98 57.30 0.71
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 2.1 1.7 2 2.4 2.05 55.68 0.69
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC 150 1 0.4 1 1.6 1.00 78.38 0.97
Indoxacarb 14.5% SC 200 1 0.6 1 1.5 1.03 77.84 0.96
UNTREATED 4.2 4.5 4.8 5 4.63 0.00 0.00

The Tobacco caterpillar population after the second application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha recorded 0 larva/plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 das and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 ml/ha showed maximum reduction in larval population by recording 0, 0, 0, 0.1 larvae/plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 Days after spraying in the combination treatments followed by Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750 ml/ha with 0.1, 0, 0, 0.3 larva/plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 das and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250 ml/ha recorded 0.3, 0, 0, 0.4 larva/plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 das. The average larval population after the entire spraying was recorded to be lowest in Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha with 0.03 larva/plant, Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 ml/ha with 0 larva/plant followed by Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750 ml/ha recorded 0.10 larva / plant and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250 ml/ha with 0.18 larva/plant showed maximum reduction in larval population which were performing superior to market standards. The percent reduction in larval population recorded in all the treatments proved that Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha recorded 99.46% reduction and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 ml/ha with 100% reduction followed by Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750 ml/ha with 97.84% reduction and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250 ml/ha with 96.22% reduction showed maximum reduction in larval population there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the high, medium and low doses 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 Tebufenozide 24% SC, Emamectin Benzoate 4% SG recorded 57.30% and Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC recorded on 55.68% 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., Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC (1.16, 1.20, 1.22) and Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC (1.17, 1.19, 1.23) showed maximum reduction in larval population proving combination insecticide is highly synergistic in nature.

Table 12. Effect of Tebufenozide combinations on yield in Soybean.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Yield
(q/ha) % Pod
Damage
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 600 20 6.78
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 750 23 3.57
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC 900 25 1.67
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 300 19 9.14
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 250 21 7.89
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC 200 22 2.45
Tebufenozide 24% SC 800 14 19.45
Emamectin Benzoate 4% SG 220 12 15.55
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 11 17.34
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC 150 18 11.09
Indoxacarb 14.5% SC 200 17 12.44
UNTREATED 9 43
The production of healthy damage free pods and pod yield of Soybean recorded in different treatments as shown in the table above (Table 12.) 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 Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900 ml/ha with 25q/ha with 1.67% pod damage, Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750 ml/ha with 23q/ha with 3.57% pod damage, Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 300 ml/ha with 22 q/ha with 2.45% pod damage, Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250 ml/ha with 21 q/ha with 7.89% pod damage and Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 600 ml/ha with 20q/ha with 6.78% pod damage. While the individual molecules and market standards recorded yields ranging between 11-18 q/ha with pod damage percent ranging between 11.09%-19.45% which were inferior to the yield recorded in the combination molecule treatments.

Table 13. Phytotoxicity of Tebufenozide combinations on Soybean crop.
Treatments Days Visual Rating Scale
Yellowing Necrosis Wilting Vein
Clearing Leaf tip / Margin Dying Stunting / Dwarfing
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 600ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 750ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tebufenozide 24% + Emamectin Benzoate 1.5% SC @ 900ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 200ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @ 250ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tebufenozide 39.5% + Chlorantraniliprole 10.5% SC @300ml/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
Emamectin Benzoate 4% SG @ 220g/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
Flubendiamide 39.35% SC @ 150ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Indoxacarb 14.5% SC @ 200ml/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 Tebufenozide combinations 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 diacyl hydrazine insecticide;
(b) at least one insecticide selected from diamide
insecticide and / or macrocyclic lactone insecticide; and
(c) at least one agrochemical acceptable excipient.
2. 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.
3. The composition as claimed in claim 1, the diamide insecticide is selected from the group comprising but not limited to chlorantraniliprole, cyantraniliprole, cyhalodiamide, cyclaniliprole, flubendiamide, fluchlordiniliprole, pioxaniliprole, tetrachlorantraniliprole, tetraniliprole, tiorantraniliprole.
4. The composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein macrocyclic lactone insecticide 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 tebufenozide and chlorantraniliprole is formulated in suspension concentrates (SC) are present in the weight ratio of (1-50): (1-20).
6. The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein tebufenozide and emamectin is formulated in suspension concentrates (SC) are present in the weight ratio of (1-40): (1-10).
7. The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein the insecticidal composition is used in rice, wheat, fruits, roots, tubers, vegetables, maize, grains, sugarcane, cereals, field crops and various other crops for general pest control.
8. The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein the insecticidal composition is applied to preventive, curative and systemic crops by conventional methods over the target insects.