Description:FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to the field of pesticides. The present invention in particular relates to a synergistic, broad spectrum insecticidal composition comprising Fluxametamide, Bifenthrin and Acetamiprid.The present invention further relates to the process of preparation of said composition and uses thereof.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The background description includes information that may be useful in understanding the present invention. It is not an admission that any of the information provided herein is prior art or relevant to the presently claimed invention, or that any publication specifically or implicitly referenced is prior art.
Enhancement of agricultural produce requires the protection of the crops and its produce from pest damage. Various chemicals and their formulations have been developed and are in use currently for the effective management of insects and pests. Due to non-judicious use of the hitherto known pesticides, the pests gain resistance and become hard to kill. Physically compatible pesticide mixtures exhibit a better pest management. These mixtures show multifaceted advantages than when applied individually, providing a synergistic effect.
The need for more food has to be met through higher yields per unit of land, water, energy and time. Excessive use of mineral fertilizers and chemical pesticides has caused soil degradation, ground water pollution and the spread of the pest's resistant to pesticides in several areas. Hence their judicious use includes avoiding prophylactic sprays, adopting strip treatment, spot application to only those areas with heavy incidence of pests, application to the soil to avoid direct contact with the natural enemies and using selective or non-persistent pesticides. The systemic pesticides are sprayed at a concentration of 0.02 to 0.05 percent active ingredient. The contact pesticides are sprayed at 0.05 to 0.07 or even 0.1 percent active ingredient. The soil application of the granular systemic insecticides varies from 1 to 2 kg a.i./ha. The fungicides are applied up to 2 g/l depending upon the chemical used, pest species and season of the application.
Processes for insecticidal agents and compositions have been developed to control insect pests and in practice have been used as a single or a mixed agent. However, processes for the economically efficient and ecologically safe insect control compositions are still being sought. A process for the preparation of insecticidal compositions which allows for reduced effective dosage rates, increased environmental safety and lower incidence of insect resistance are highly desirable. Although the rotational application of insect control agents having different modes of action may be adopted for good pest management practice, this approach does not necessarily give satisfactory insect control. Further, even though combinations of insect control agents have been studied, a high synergistic action has not always been found. Obtaining an insecticidal composition which demonstrates no cross-resistance to existing insecticidal agents, no toxicity problems and little negative impact on the environment is extremely difficult.
Fluxametamide a novel wide-spectrum insecticide that was discovered and synthesized by M/s. Nissan Chemical Industries, Ltd. It belongs to a class of compounds called isoxazolines, which are potent inhibitors of ?-aminobutyric acid (GABA), glutamate-, and glycine-gated chloride channels in insects, and exhibit high insecticidal activity against a variety of insect species, such as Lepidoptera, Thysanoptera, Acarina, and Diptera
It has an IUPAC name 4-[(5RS)-5-(3,5-dichlorophenyl)-4,5-dihydro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-1,2-oxazol-3-yl]-N-[EZ-(methoxyimino)methyl]-o-toluamide having chemical structure as:


FLUXAMETAMIDE
Acetamiprid is a systemic insecticide and it acts by binding to the acetylcholine site on nicotinoyl acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs), causing a range of symptoms from hyperexcitation to lethargy and paralysis in the insects. Acetamiprid controls insect species such as Hemiptera, Thysanoptera and Lepidoptera.
It has an IUPAC name (E)-N-[(6-chloro-3-pyridyl)methyl]-N'-cyano-N-methylacetamidine having chemical structure as:

ACETAMIPIRID
Bifenthrin with CAS registration number 82657-04-3,is a pyrethroid insecticide. It is a contact insecticide, and it acts by disrupting the gating mechanism of sodium channels that are involved in the generation and conduction of nerve impulses, causing rapid paralysis and death of the insects. Bifenthrin controls insect species such as Coleoptera, Diptera, Heteroptera, Lepidoptera, Orthoptera and some Acarina.

It has an IUPAC name (2-methylbiphenyl-3yl-methyl-(Z)-(1RS, 3RS)-3-(2-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoroprop-1-enyl]-2,2-dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate.

BIFENTHRIN

The existing problems and limitations in the current agricultural pest managementtechniques that the present disclosure seeks to address:
1. Development of Pest Resistance:
a. Many pests have developed resistance to single active ingredient insecticides, making them less effective over time.
b. Conventional insecticides often require increased dosages to achieve the same level of pest control, which is unsustainable and increases the risk of environmental contamination.
c. The frequent use of single-action insecticides leads to the rapid evolution of resistant pest populations, reducing long-term pest management efficacy.
2. Limited Spectrum of Pest Control:
a. Single active ingredient insecticides or basic tank mixtures may not be effective against a broad range of insect pests, leading to incomplete control.
b. Farmers often need to use multiple products to target different pests, which increases costs and complicates pest management practices.
c. Existing solutions may fail to control certain pests like whiteflies, thrips, aphids, and mites effectively in crops like cotton and chili.
3. Sub optimal Synergy in Tank Mixes:
a. Tank mixtures of individual insecticides do not always exhibit true synergistic effects. The combination may result in antagonistic or merely additive effects, which do not significantly enhance pest control.
b. Inconsistent performance of tank mixes can be attributed to the instability of the combined components, leading to inadequate pest control and uneven application.
4. Stability Issues in Formulations:
a. Existing insecticidal formulations often suffer from stability issues, especially under varying environmental conditions such as high or low temperatures.
b. Instability can lead to the separation of active ingredients, reduced efficacy, and challenges in storage and transport.
c. Unstable formulations are harder to apply uniformly, affecting the overall effectiveness of pest control measures.
5. Need for Higher Dosages:
a. Due to the lack of synergistic action, traditional formulations or single active ingredient products may require higher dosages to achieve effective pest control.
b. Increased dosages not only raise the cost of pest management but also heighten the risk of crop phytotoxicity and environmental damage, including potential harm to beneficial insects and non-target organisms.

6. Environmental and Safety Concerns:
a. The use of higher concentrations of insecticides contributes to environmental pollution and poses health risks to farmworkers and consumers.
b. There is a growing need for formulations that are effective at lower concentrations, minimizing environmental impact while maintaining pest control efficacy.
c. Safety concerns also arise from formulations that produce harmful residues or have poor degradability, necessitating safer and more eco-friendly options.
7. Application Challenges and Inconsistent Results:
a. Some existing formulations are difficult to mix or apply, leading to inconsistent distribution of the insecticide on crops.
b. Poorly mixed insecticides may form clumps or separate into different phases, making uniform application challenging and reducing the effectiveness of the treatment.
c. The variability in application quality can result in areas of the crop being underprotected, leaving them vulnerable to pest damage.
8. Economic Inefficiency:
a. The need for multiple insecticides or repeated applications due to inadequate control increases the financial burden on farmers.
b. Inefficient pest management practices can lead to significant crop losses and reduced profitability for farmers.
c. A more effective, stable, and broad-spectrum insecticidal composition can reduce overall costs and enhance agricultural productivity.
The present disclosure aims to overcome these limitations by providing a synergistic insecticidal composition of Fluxametamide, Bifenthrin and Acetamiprid, ensuring high efficacy at lower dosages, broad-spectrum pest control, formulation stability, and minimal environmental impact.
OBJECT OF THE INVENTION
The main objective of the disclosure is to provide a synergistic insecticidal composition combining Fluxametamide, Bifenthrin and Acetamiprid that enhances pest control efficacy beyond the sum of individual effects.
Another important object of the present disclosure is to deliver broad-spectrum pest control that effectively targets a variety of insect pests, including Fruit borer & whitefly across different crops like Brinjal and tomato.
Another object of the present disclosure is to reduce the likelihood of pest resistance by utilizing a multi-component approach, thereby decreasing the dependence on single-action insecticides.
Yet another object of the present disclosure is to ensure stability of the formulation under various environmental conditions, minimizing separation or degradation of active ingredients for consistent performance.
Yet another object of the present disclosure is to lower the required dosage levels while maintaining effective pest control, reducing potential phytotoxicity to crops and minimizing environmental impact.
Yet another object of the present disclosure is to provide an easy-to-mix and apply formulation that ensures uniform distribution on crops, improving application efficiency and overall pest control results.
Yet another object of the present disclosure is to create an environmentally safer alternative by minimizing harmful residues, thus reducing health risks for farmers, consumers, and non-target organisms.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
Accordingly, in one aspect, the present invention provides an insecticide composition comprising Fluxametamide, Bifenthrin and Acetamiprid.
In one aspect, the present invention provides a synergistic composition of Fluxametamide, Bifenthrin and Acetamiprid and agrochemically acceptable additives.
In yet another aspect, the present invention provides a synergistic composition comprising Fluxametamide, Bifenthrin and Acetamiprid the composition possesses Insecticidal activity.
In a further aspect, the present invention provides a method for effective control of various pest in plants.
In one aspect of the present invention, the Insecticidal composition of the present invention further comprises an agrochemically acceptable excipients selected from the group consisting of anti-freezing agent, dispersing agents, wetting agents, antifoaming agents, biocides, thickeners, surfactants, preservatives, colorants, pigments, buffers, solvents, and the like. Additional components may also be included, e.g., protective colloids, adhesives, thickeners, thixotropic agents, penetration agents, stabilisers, sequestering agents.
In another aspect of the present invention, the Insecticidal composition is formulated as capsule suspension (CS), Dispersible concentrate (DC), Dustable powder (DP), Powder for dry seed treatment (DS), Emulsifiable concentrate (EC), Emulsifiable granule (EG) Emulsifiable water-in-oil (EO), Emulsifiable powder (EP), Emulsifiable for seed treatment (ES), Emulsifiable oil-in-water (EW), flowable concentrate for seed treatment (FS), Suspension Concentrate (SC), Suspo-emulsion (SE), Oil Dispersion (OD).Water dispersible powder for slurry seed treatment (WS), Water dispersible granules (WDG) and Wettable powders (WP), a mixed formulation of CS and SC (ZC), soluble liquid (SL).
In another further aspect the insecticidal composition of the present invention is preferably formulated as a Suspension Concentrate (SC), and flowable concentrate for seed treatment (FS).
In yet another embodiment of the present invention, the invention further provides the process for preparation of the said formulation wherein, the said formulation can be one or more of capsule suspension (CS), Dispersible concentrate (DC), Dustable powder (DP), Powder for dry seed treatment (DS), Emulsifiable concentrate (EC), Emulsifiable granule (EG) Emulsifiable water-in-oil (EO), Emulsifiable powder (EP), Emulsifiable for seed treatment (ES), Emulsifiable oil-in-water (EW), flowable concentrate for seed treatment (FS), Suspension Concentrate (SC), Suspo-emulsion (SE), Water dispersible powder for slurry seed treatment (WS), Water dispersible granules (WDG) and Wettable powders (WP), a mixed formulation of CS and SC (ZC), soluble liquid (SL).
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
Discussed below are some representative embodiments of the present invention. The invention in its broader aspects is not limited to the specific details and representative methods. The illustrative examples are described in this section in connection with the embodiments and methods provided. The invention according to its various aspects is particularly pointed out and distinctly claimed in the appended claims read in view of this specification and appropriate equivalents.
It is to be noted that, as used in the specification and the appended claims, the singular forms "a", "an" and "the" include plural referents unless the context clearly dictates otherwise. Thus, for example, reference to a composition containing “a compound” includes a mixture of two or more compounds. It should also be noted that the term “or” is generally employed in its sense including “and/or” unless the content clearly dictates otherwise.
The expression of various quantities in terms of “% w/w” or “%” means the percentage by weight, relative to the weight of the total solution or composition unless otherwise specified.
The term “active ingredient” (a.i.) or “active agent” used herein refers to that component of the composition responsible for control of Fungal-pests or disease.
As used herein, the terms "comprises", "comprising", "includes", "including", or any other variation thereof, are intended to cover a non-exclusive inclusion, subject to any limitation explicitly indicated. For example, a composition or a method that comprises a list of elements is not necessarily limited to only those elements but may include other elements not expressly listed or inherent to such composition, or method.
The term "synergistic", as used herein, refers the combined action of two or more active agents blended together and administered conjointly that is greater than the sum of their individual effects.
As used herein, the term “composition” or "formulation" can be used interchangeably, unless stated otherwise, is meant to encompass, and are not limited to, compositions or formulations containing the combination of Fluxametamide, Bifenthrin and Acetamiprid.
As used herein, the term “additive(s)” or "auxiliary agent(s)" or “agrochemically acceptable carrier(s)” can be used interchangeably and refers to inert substances which are commonly used as diluent, to provide stability or to increase the activity profile of the composition or formulation with or without having agrochemical activity or direct effect on the undesired phytopathogenic insects and/or microorganisms.
As used herein, the term "agrochemically acceptable salts" are typically acid addition salts of inorganic or organic acids, preferably of hydrochloric acid, hydrobromic acid, sulfuric acid, nitric acid, perchloric acid, phosphoric acid, formic acid, acetic acid, trifluoroacetic acid, oxalic acid, malonic acid, toluene sulfonic acid or benzoic acid.
As used herein, the term "effective amount" means the amount of the active substances in the compositions to achieve an observable effect on growth, including the effects of necrosis, death,retardation, prevention, and removal, destruction, or otherwise diminishing the occurrence and activity of the target organism. The effective amount can vary for the various compositions used in the present invention. An effective amount of the compositions will also vary according to the prevailing conditions such as desired pesticidal effect and duration, weather, target species, locus, mode of application, and the like.
In an embodiment, the Insecticidal composition wherein the Fluxametamide ranging from 0.1% to 30.0% by weight of the Insecticidal composition.
In another preferred embodiment of the present invention, Fluxametamide is present in an amount of 7.2% weight of the Insecticidal composition.
In an embodiment, the Insecticidal composition wherein the Bifenthrin ranging from 0.1% to 30.0% by weight of the Insecticidal composition.
In another preferred embodiment of the present invention, Bifenthrin is present in an amount of 6.8% weight of the Insecticidal composition.
In an embodiment, the Insecticidal composition wherein the Acetamiprid ranging from 0.1% to 30.0% by weight of the Insecticidal composition.
In another preferred embodiment of the present invention, Acetamipridis present in an amount of 12% weight of the Insecticidal composition.
In another embodiment of the present invention, the invention further provides the process for preparation of the said formulation wherein, the said formulation can be one or more of as suspension concentrate (SC), wettable granules (WG), wettable powder (WP), a water dispersible granule (WDG), a water dispersible tablet (WT), an ultra-low volu (ULV) liquid (UL), an ultra-low volume (ULV) suspension (SU), a water soluble powder (SP), a suspo-emulsion (SE), granule (GR), an emulsifiable granule (EG), an oil-in-water or water in oil emulsion (EW), an emulsifiable concentrate (EC), a micro-emulsion (ME), an oil dispersion (OD), a capsule suspension (CS), a dustable powder (DP) or an aerosol (AE).
In preferred embodiment of the present invention, the formulation is Suspension Concentrate (SC), and flowable concentrate for seed treatment (FS).
In yet another embodiment of the present invention, the agrochemically acceptable excipients of the formulation are selected from the group consisting of dispersing agents, wetting cum dispersing agents, antifoaming agents, Rheology modifiers, solvents, biocides, pH Modifiers, Stabilizing agents, anti-freezing agent and coloring agents .
Dispersing agent is selected from the group comprising of, but not limited to polymeric ester dispersant, ethoxylated polyarylphenol phosphate ester, sodium salt of naphthalene sulfonate condensate/naphthalene sulphonic acid condensate, acrylic copolymer, nonionic proprietary surfactant blend, polycarboxylates, calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate, aryl sulphonate condensate, sodium lignosulphonate, dispertox BS SPL, polystyrenatedacrylated co-polymer, modified styrene acrylic copolymer, salts of phenol sulfonic acids, Terwet 2700, butyl polyalkylene oxide block co-polymer, mixture of tristyrylphenolethoxylates and polyalkylene oxide derivative of a synthetic alcohol, random co-polymer of alcoxylated polyethylene glycol or mixtures thereof; The Dispersing agent is present in an amount of from 0.1% to 20.0% by weight based on a total weight of the composition.
In an embodiment, the wetting cum dispersing agent is selected from the group comprising of, but not limited to non-ionic proprietary surfactant blend alkylphenol ethoxylates or polyoxyethylene sorbitan esters, lignosulfonates, sodium salt of naphthalene sulfonate condensates, tristyrylphenol ethoxylates. In a preferred embodiment, the wetting cum dispersing agent in an amount of from 0.1% to 5.0% by weight based on a total weight of the composition.

Antifoaming agent is selected from the group comprising of, but not limited to polydimethyl siloxane, polydimethyl siloxane emulsion or mixtures thereof; The Antifoaming agent is present in an amount of from 0.01% to 7.0% by weight based on a total weight of the composition.
Rheology modifier is selected from the group comprising of, but not limited to precipitated silica, fumed silica, modified fumed silica, bentonite, hydroxymethyl cellulose, carboxymethyl cellulose, xanthan gum, thickening silica, hydrated clay minerals, magnesium aluminium silicates, organic derivative of hectorite clay, hydrophobic fumed silica, polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) or mixture thereof; The Rheology modifier is present in an amount of from 0.1% to 12.0% by weight based on a total weight of the composition.
Solvents is selected from the group comprising of, but not limited to Demineralized (DM) water, N-alkyl-pyrrolidone, oil medium selected from the group comprising, esterified fatty acids selected from methyl and/or ethyl ester of vegetable oil such as methyl soyate, ethyl soyate, rapeseed methyl ester, rapeseed ethyl ester or mixtures thereof. The Solvents is present in an amount of from 1% to 95% by weight based on a total weight of the composition.
Anti freezing agents is selected from the group comprising of, but not limited to selected from the group comprising of ethylene glycol, propane-1,2-diol, propane-1,2,3-triol, urea or mixtures thereof. The Anti freezing agents is present in an amount of from 0% to 15% by weight based on a total weight of the composition.
Stabilizing agents is selected from the group comprising of, but not limited to selected from the group comprising of epoxidized soyabean oil, butylated hydroxy toluene, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, Precipitated Silica, sodium benzoate, etc. or mixtures thereof. The Stabilizing agents is present in an amount of from 1% to 10% by weight based on a total weight of the composition.
Biocide is selected from the group comprising of 1,2-benzisothiazolin-3-one, formaldehyde, dipropyl glycol solution of 1,2-benzisothiazolin-3-one or mixtures thereof. The Biocide is present in an amount of from 0% to 3 % by weight based on a total weight of the composition.
Coloring agent is selected from the group comprising of dye, pigment or mixtures thereof such as Triaryl methane acid blue, 3-hydroxy-N-(2-methylphenyl)-4-[(E)-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl)diazinyl]-2-naphthamideand Acid Brilliant Green. The Coloring agent is present in an amount of 0.01% to 5.0 % by weight based on a total weight of the composition.
The composition of the present invention is effective for management of insect or pests selected from one or more of Cotton (Gossypium spp.), Paddy (Oryza sativa), Wheat (Triticumaestavum), Barley (Hordeum vulgare), Maize (Zea mays), Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor), Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum) , Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris), Soybean (Glycin max), Peanut (Arachis hypogaea), Sunflower (Helianthus annuus) , Mustard (Brassica juncea), Rape seed (Brassica napus), Linseed (Linum usitatissimum), Sesame (Sesamum indicum), Castor (Ricinus communis), Green gram (Vigna radiate), Black gram (Vigna mungo), Chickpea (Ciceraritinum), Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata), Redgram (Cajanus cajan), Frenchbean (Phaseolus vulgaris), Indian bean (Lablab purpureus), Horse gram (Macrotyloma uniflorum), Field pea (Pisum sativum), Cluster bean (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba), Lentils (Lens culinaris), Brinjal (Solanum melongena), Cabbage (Brassica oleracea var. capitata), Cauliflower (Brassica oleracea var. botrytis), Okra (Abelmoschus esculentus), Onion (Allium cepa L.), Tomato (Solanum lycopersicun) , Potato (Solanum tuberosum) , Sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas), Chilly (Capsicum annum), Garlic (Allium sativum), Cucumber (Cucumis sativus), Muskmelons (Cucumis melo), Watermelon (Citrullus lanatus), Bottle gourd (Lagenaria siceraria), Bitter gourd (Momordica charantia), Radish (Raphanus sativus), Carrot (Dacus carota subsp. sativus), Turnip (Brassica rapasubsprapa), Apple (Melus domestica), Banana (Musa 25 spp.), Citrus groups (Citrus spp.), Grape (Vitis vinifera), Guava (Psidium guajava), Litchi (Litchi chinensis), Mango (Mangifera indica), Papaya (Carica papaya), Pineapple (Ananas comosus), Pomegranate (Punica granatum) , Sapota (Manilkara zapota), Tea (Camellia sinensis), Coffea (Coffea Arabica), Turmeric (Curcuma longa), Ginger (Zingiber officinale), Cumin (Cuminum cyminum), Fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-30 graecum), Fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), Coriander (Coriandrum sativum), Ajwain (Trachyspermumammi), Psyllium (Plantago ovate), Black Pepper (Piper nigrum), Stevia (Stevia rebaudiana), Safedmusli (Chlorophytum tuberosum), Drum stick (Moringa oleifera), Coconut (Coco nucifera), Mentha ( Mentha spp.), Rose (Rosa spp.), Jasmine (Jasminum spp.), Marigold (Tagetes spp.), Common daisy (Bellis perennis), Dahlia (Dahlia hortnesis), Gerbera (Gerbera jamesonii), Carnation (Dianthus caryophyllus) or GMO form thereof.
In yet another preferred embodiment, the present invention provides a insecticidal combination or composition comprising of, Fluxametamide, Bifenthrin and Acetamiprid to control the pathogenic microorganism on economically important crops such as rice, chilli, cotton, Brinjal apple, peppers, soybean, cotton, chick pea, Brinjal, pigeon pea, Grapes, Apple and pomegranate, tea, potato, and tomato.
The invention is illustrated by the experiments as exemplified below.
Examples:
The examples below are given solely for the purpose of illustration and are not to be construed as limitations of the present invention, as many variations thereof are possible without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.

Example 1: Preparation of insecticidal composition as Suspension concentrates (SC):
In an embodiment, the chemical composition of the present insecticidal is depicted below in Table 1 (a) below:
Table 1a: Insecticidal Composition for Suspension concentrates (SC).
Component Composition (%w/w) Remark
Fluxametamide 7.20 Active Ingredient
Bifenthrin 6.80 Active Ingredient
Acetamiprid 12.00 Active Ingredient
Nonionic proprietary surfactant blend
2.00 Wetting cum dispersing agent
Acrylic copolymer 2.50 Dispersing agent
Propane-1,2,3-triol 8.00 Antifreezing Agent
Dipropylene glycol solution of 1,2-benzisothiazolin-3-one 0.10 Biocide
Polydimethylsiloxane emulsion 0.50 Antifoaming agent
Precipitated Silica 2.00 Stabilising agent
Xanthum gum (2 % w/w aqueous) 0.20 Rheology modifier
DemineralizedWater Balance to 100 Solvent

Process for preparing Suspension concentrates (SC)formulation:
• In demineralized dipropylene glycol solution of 1,2-benzisothiazolin-3-one, polydimethylsiloxane emulsion, propane-1,2,3-triol, nonionic proprietary surfactant blend and acrylic copolymeras were added into the clean pre-mixing vessel fitted with thehomogenizer to form a uniform premix.
• Add active ingredients—fluxametamide, bifenthrin, acetamiprid—and precipitated silica to the premix.
• Continue homogenizing until a uniform slurry is formed.
• Pass the slurry through a jacketed bead mill with chilled water circulation.
• Aim to achieve a particle size where d(90) is less than 20 microns, ensuring consistency and efficacy in application.
• Transfer the milled slurry to a post-mixing vessel equipped with a stirrer.
• Add a rheology modifier, specifically 2% xanthan gum solution in demineralized water.
• Mix thoroughly until a homogeneous suspension concentrate (SC) is formed.
Example 2: Preparation of insecticidal composition as Flowable Suspension for Seed Treatment (FS) Formulation:
Table-1 (b): Insecticidal Composition of the Flowable Suspension for Seed Treatment (FS) Formulation.
Component Composition (%w/w) Remark
Fluxametamide 7.20 Active Ingredient
Bifenthrin 6.80 Active Ingredient
Acetamiprid 12.00 Active Ingredient
Nonionic proprietary surfactant blend
2.00 Wetting cum dispersing agent
Acrylic copolymer 2.50 Dispersing agent
Propane-1,2,3-triol 8.00 Antifreezing Agent
Dipropylene glycol solution of 1,2-benzisothiazolin-3-one 0.10 Biocide
Polydimethylsiloxane emulsion 0.50 Antifoaming agent
Precipitated Silica 2.00 Stabilising agent
Triaryl methane acid blue 0.10 Coloring agent
Xanthum gum (2 % w/w aqueous) 0.20 Rheology modifier
Demineralized Water Balance to 100 Solvent

Process for preparing Flowable suspension for seed treatment (FS) formulation:
1 In demineralized dipropylene glycol solution of 1,2-benzisothiazolin-3-one, polydimethylsiloxane emulsion, propane-1,2,3-triol, nonionic proprietary surfactant blend and acrylic copolymeras were added into the clean pre-mixing vessel fitted with the homogenizer to mix thoroughly, forming a uniform premix.
2. Add active ingredients, fluxametamide, bifenthrin, acetamiprid, precipitated silica and coloring agent added to the premix.
3. Continue homogenizing to produce a consistent slurry.
4.Pass the slurry through a jacketed bead mill with chilled water circulation.
5. Ensure the particle size is reduced to d(90) < 20 microns for uniform distribution and effectiveness.
6. Transfer the milled slurry to a post-mixing vessel equipped with a stirrer.
7. Add a rheology modifier, specifically 2% xanthan gum solution in demineralized water.
9. Mix thoroughly until the xanthan gum is evenly incorporated, forming a homogeneous Flowable Suspension (FS).
Stability Data
Stability Study (Accelerated Storage test and low-temperature storage test)
According to the FAO/WHO manual, the “accelerated storage test” is considered as an indicative of product stability. That is, accelerated storage test data provides an indication that the product is stable for at least two years at ambient temperature. Further, the FAO/WHO manual indicates storage at 54 ± 2°C for 14 days as the default test conditions. Further, the FAO/WHO manual indicates low-temperature storage at 0 ± 2°C for 7 days.
The “accelerated storage” is the sample after subjecting the sample to accelerated storage tests at 54±2°C for 14 days.
The insecticidal formulation composition of examples 1 - 3 were found stable after accelerated stability study at 54 ± 2° C for 14 days and low temperature at 0 ± 2°C for 7 days. The insecticidal formulation composition of examples 5 - 6 were found stable after accelerated stability study at 54 ± 2° C for 14 days.
Table 2: Stability data for suspension concentrate (SC) of Fluxametamide composition
Sr. No. Test Unit of measurement Results
14 days Ambient 14 days
Accelerated storage at
54 °C
1 Appearance -- White to Off white homogeneous suspension free from extraneous matter White to Off white homogeneous suspension free from extraneous matter
2 Active content % w/w
As Fluxametamide 7.47 7.38
As Bifenthrin 7.50 7.46
As Acetamiprid 12.50 12.36
3 Suspensibility gravimetrically in CIPAC standard water D at 25 ± 5°C. % w/w 95.3 94.8
4 pH -- 6.44 6.19
5 Viscosity cPs 679 842
6 Wet Sieve retained on 75µ test sieve % w/w 0.10 0.10
7 Mean particle size (d50) µm 3.23 3.11
8 Density at 27°C gm/ml 1.099 Not applicable
9 Persistent Foam ml 6 6
10 Pourability (as residue) % w/w 4.6 4.8
11 Spontaneity of dispersion in CIPAC standard water D at 30 ± 2°C % w/w 97.9 96.6
12 Stability at 0°Cfor 7 days -- After storage at 0 ± 2°C for 7 days, the formulation complies the general criteria of suspensibility and wet sieve test of formulation

Note: Insecticidal composition of Fluxametamide combination meets the general criteria of suspension concentrates at elevated temperature 54±2° C for 14 days and low temperature at 0 ± 2°C for 7 days.
Synergistic effect of the different Insecticidal Composition:
Synergistic effect was checked using Colby’s method for ternary mixes. In the Colby’s method, for a given combination of three active components, E (expected efficacy) can be expressed as:
E = A + B + C – (AB + AC + BC) + (ABC)
100 10000
Where, E = expected efficacy,
A, B and C = the efficacy of three active ingredients A, B and C at a given dose.
Synergy ratio (R) = Experimentally observed efficacy (O)
Expected efficacy (E)
If the synergism ratio (R) between observed and expected is >1 then synergy is exhibited, if R=1 then the effect is additive and if R<1 then the mix is antagonistic.
The experimental data was statistically analysed by Randomized Block Design (RBD) (One factor analysis) using OPSTAT HAU statistical software. The results are expressed as Mean ± SE (standard error) and data was statistically analysed by one-way Analysis of variance (ANOVA), with the level of significance set at p < 0.01.
Example 3: Bio-efficacy of an Insecticidal Composition and thereof (Fluxametamide + Bifenthrin + Acetamiprid) on brinjal and tomato crops.
Phytotoxicity observations
For the evaluation of phytotoxicity on brinjal & tomato crops, observations were made by observing the temporary or long lasting damage to the leaves if any viz., yellowing, wilting, necrosis, epinasty and hyponasty at 5, 10 and 15 DAS of the synergistic insecticidal composition of the present invention. Crop injury was observed on visual rating from 0-10 scale as presented in Table 3.
Table 3. Phytotoxicity rating scale
Rating Crop Injury (%) Description
0 - No symptoms
1 1-10 slight discoloration
2 11-20 More severe, but not lasting
3 21-30 Moderate and more lasting
4 31-40 Medium and lasting
5 41-50 Moderately heavy
6 51-60 Heavy
7 61-70 Very heavy
8 71-80 Nearly destroyed
9 81-90 Destroyed
10 91-100 Completely destroyed

Amongsolanaceousvegetables, brinjal (Solanum melongena L.) is one of the important crops grown throughout India. Eggplant is also one among the few vegetables capable of high yields in hot-wet environments.Brinjal fruits are reasonable sources of high nutritive value and contains all the essential minerals, vitamins and amino acids.India is the second largest producer of brinjal in the world next to China.Insect pests infestation is one the major constraints for commercial production in all brinjal growing areas. Generally, brinjal crop attacks by many insects such as shoot and fruit borer, leafhopper, whitefly, thrips, aphid, leaf roller, stem borer and blister beetle

Table 4: Effect of different treatments on the population of whitefly in Brinjal.
Sr. No.
Treatment Compositions Dosage/ha Average no. of Whitefly per leaf Per cent reduction over control Colby’s synergistic ratio
Dosage/ha
a.i. (gm) Formulation (gm/ml) 3 DAS 5 DAS 7 DAS 10 DAS % Control
5 DAS % Control
10 DAS 5 DAS 10 DAS
1 Fluxametamide 10% EC 40 400 5.50 (2.54) 7.00 (2.82) 7.50 (2.91) 8.97 (3.15) 37.50 36.56 - -
2 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 500 4.83 (2.41) 6.03 (2.64) 6.40 (2.72) 7.70 (2.94) 46.13 45.52 - -
3 Acetamiprid 20% SP 60 300 4.37 (2.31) 5.33 (2.51) 5.53 (2.55) 6.70 (2.77) 52.38 52.59
4 Fluxametamide 10% EC + Bifenthrin 10% EC + Acetamiprid 20% SP 40 + 50 + 60 400 + 500 + 300 1.23 (1.49) 1.20 (1.48) 1.20 (1.48) 1.67 (1.63) 89.29 88.21 1.06 1.055
5 Fluxametamide 6.5% +Bifenthrin 6.0% +Acetamiprid 10% 22.75 + 21 + 35 350 2.40 (1.84) 2.74 (1.93) 3.18 (2.04) 3.94 (2.22) 75.57 72.12 0.90 0.863
6 Fluxametamide 6.5% +Bifenthrin 6.0% +Acetamiprid 10% 26 + 24 + 40 400 1.97 (1.72) 2.40 (1.84) 2.53 (1.87) 3.52 (2.11) 78.57 75.12 0.93 0.898
7 Fluxametamide 6.5% +Bifenthrin 6.0% +Acetamiprid 10% 29.25 + 27 + 45 450 1.90(1.70) 2.07(1.75) 2.47(1.85) 3.00(2.00) 81.55 78.77 0.97 0.942
8 Untreated Check - - 8.43 (3.07) 11.20 (3.49) 12.40 (3.66) 14.13 (3.89) - - - -
CD at 5% - - 0.16 0.18 0.16 0.17 - - - -
SE (m) - - 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 - - - -
Figure in parenthesis represents square root transformed value; DAS: Days After Spray

Among all the treatments the tank-mix combinations of Fluxametamide 10% EC @ 40 gm a.i./ha + Bifenthrin 10% EC@ 50 gm a.i./ha + Acetamiprid 20% SP@ 60 gm a.i./ha was observed with highest per cent controlof the population of whitefly recorded with 89.29% and88.21% control at 5th and 10th day after spray, respectively followed by Fluxametamide 6.5% + Bifenthrin 6.0% + Acetamiprid 10% @ 29.25 + 27 + 45 gm a.i./ha, Fluxametamide 6.5% + Bifenthrin 6.0% + Acetamiprid 10% @ 26 + 24 + 40 gm a.i./ha and Fluxametamide 6.5% + Bifenthrin 6.0% + Acetamiprid 10% @ 22.75 + 21 + 35 gm a.i./ha. All the doses of pre-mix formulation of Fluxametamide 6.5% + Bifenthrin 6.0% + Acetamiprid 10%applied @ 29.25 + 27 + 45 gm a.i./ha,26 + 24 + 40gm a.i./ha and 22.75 + 21 + 35gm a.i./ha observed with 78.77%, 75.12% and 72.12% reduction over untreated control at 10th DAS, respectively.
All the doses of Fluxametamide 6.5% + Bifenthrin 6.0% + Acetamiprid 10%showed better efficacy compared to the individual applications of Acetamiprid 20% SP @ 60 gm a.i./ha (52.59%), Bifenthrin 10% EC@ 50 gm a.i./ha (45.52%) and Fluxametamide 10% EC @ 40 gm a.i./ha (36.56%) against whitefly of brinjal at 10th day after spray. Among the treatments only tank-mix combination of Fluxametamide 10% EC @ 40 gm a.i./ha + Bifenthrin 10% EC@ 50 gm a.i./ha + Acetamiprid 20% SP@ 60 gm a.i./ha showed synergistic effect with the synergistic ratio 1.05 (>1) at 10 DAS. (Table 4).

Table 5: Effect of different treatments on the population of whitefly in Brinjal.
Sr. No.
Treatment Compositions Dosage/ha Average no. of Whitefly per leaf Per cent reduction over control Colby’s synergistic ratio
Dosage/ha
a.i. (gm) Formulation (gm/ml) 3 DAS 5 DAS 7 DAS 10 DAS % Control
5 DAS % Control
10 DAS 5 DAS 10 DAS
1 Fluxametamide 10% EC 40 400 5.37 (2.52) 5.83 (2.60) 6.70 (2.77) 8.33 (3.05) 38.81 37.81 - -
2 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 500 5.03 (2.45) 5.27 (2.50) 5.67 (2.57) 7.17 (2.85) 44.76 46.52 - -
3 Acetamiprid 20% SP 60 300 4.20 (2.26) 4.40 (2.32) 4.87 (2.42) 6.53 (2.74) 53.85 51.24
4 Fluxametamide 10% EC + Bifenthrin 10% EC + Acetamiprid 20% SP 40 + 50 + 60 400 + 500 + 300 1.17 (1.47) 1.10 (1.44) 1.07 (1.43) 1.40 (1.54) 88.46 89.55 1.04 1.069
5 Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% +Acetamiprid 12% 25.20 + 23.80 + 42 350 1.74 (1.65) 1.65 (1.62) 1.88 (1.69) 2.63 (1.90) 82.69 80.35 0.98 0.959
6 Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% +Acetamiprid 12% 28.80 + 27.20 + 48 400 1.00 (1.41) 0.90 (1.37) 1.00 (1.41) 1.00 (1.41) 90.56 92.54 1.07 1.104
7 Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% +Acetamiprid 12% 32.40 + 30.60 + 54 450 0.87 (1.36) 0.70 (1.30) 0.73 (1.31) 0.70 (1.30) 92.66 94.78 1.09 1.131
8 Untreated Check - - 8.47 (3.07) 9.53 (3.24) 11.27 (3.50) 13.40 (3.79) - - - -
CD at 5% - - 0.21 0.19 0.20 0.17 - - - -
SE (m) - - 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 - - - -
Figure in parenthesis represents square root transformed value; DAS: Days After Spray
Among all the doses of combination and individual treatments, Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% + Acetamiprid 12%@ 32.40 + 30.60 + 54 gm a.i./hawas observed with highest per cent control of whitefly population recorded with 94.78% control at 10th DAS and found at par with Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% + Acetamiprid 12%@ 28.80 + 27.20 + 48 gm a.i./ha (92.54%) and Fluxametamide 10% EC @ 40 gm a.i./ha + Bifenthrin 10% EC@ 50 gm a.i./ha + Acetamiprid 20% SP@ 25 gm a.i./ha (89.55%) followed by Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% + Acetamiprid 12%@ 25.20 + 23.80 + 42 gm a.i./ha (80.35%) at 10th DAS.
All the doses of Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% + Acetamiprid 12% showed better efficacy compared to the individual applications of Acetamiprid 20% SP @ 60 gm a.i./ha (51.24%), Bifenthrin 10% EC@ 50 gm a.i./ha (46.52%) and Fluxametamide 10% EC @ 40 gm a.i./ha (37.81%) against whitefly of brinjal at 10th day after spray. Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% + Acetamiprid 12%@ 28.80 + 27.20 + 48 gm a.i./ha showed synergistic effect with the synergistic ratio1.10 (>1) at 10 DAS. (Table 5).

Table 6: Effect of different treatments on the population of whitefly in Brinjal.
Sr. No.
Treatment Compositions Dosage/ha Average no. of Whitefly per leaf Per cent reduction over control Colby’s synergistic ratio
Dosage/ha
a.i. (gm) Formulation (gm/ml) 3 DAS 5 DAS 7 DAS 10 DAS % Control
5 DAS %
Control
10 DAS 5 DAS 10 DAS
1 Fluxametamide 10% EC 40 400 4.84 (2.41) 6.60 (2.75) 7.48 (2.91) 9.27 (3.20) 36.33 35.50 - -
2 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 500 4.11 (2.26) 5.43 (2.53) 6.40 (2.72) 8.04 (3.00) 47.59 44.04 - -
3 Acetamiprid 20% SP 60 300 3.65 (2.15) 4.85 (2.41) 5.57 (2.56) 7.09 (2.84) 53.18 50.63
4 Fluxametamide 10% EC + Bifenthrin 10% EC + Acetamiprid 20% SP 40 + 50 + 60 400 + 500 + 300 0.90 (1.37) 1.20 (1.48) 1.19 (1.47) 1.63 (1.61) 88.42 88.68 1.04 1.07
5 Fluxametamide 8.2% + Bifenthrin 7.8% +Acetamiprid 13% 28.70 + 27.30 + 45.50 350 1.29 (1.51) 1.62 (1.61) 1.80 (1.67) 2.57 (1.88) 84.34 82.09 1.00 0.99
6 Fluxametamide 8.2% + Bifenthrin 7.8% +Acetamiprid 13% 32.80 + 31.20 + 52 400 0.75 (1.31) 0.88 (1.37) 0.90 (1.37) 1.00 (1.41) 91.48 93.04 1.08 1.13
7 Fluxametamide 8.2% + Bifenthrin 7.8% +Acetamiprid 13% 36.90 + 35.10 + 58.50 450 0.85 (1.35) 0.68 (1.29) 0.68 (1.29) 0.69 (1.29) 93.44 95.22 1.10 1.15
8 Untreated Check - - 7.23 (2.86) 10.37 (3.36) 12.40 (3.66) 14.37 (3.91) - - - -
CD at 5% - - 0.18 0.18 0.15 0.16 - - - -
SE (m) - - 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 - - - -
Figure in parenthesis represents square root transformed value; DAS: Days After Spray
Among all the doses of combination and individual treatments, Fluxametamide 8.2% + Bifenthrin 7.8% + Acetamiprid 13%@ 36.90 + 35.10 + 58.50 gm a.i./hawas observed with highest per cent control of whitefly recorded with 95.22% control and found at par with Fluxametamide 8.2% + Bifenthrin 7.8% + Acetamiprid 13%@ 32.80 + 31.20 + 52 gm a.i./ha (93.04%) and Fluxametamide 10% EC @ 40 gm a.i./ha + Bifenthrin 10% EC @ 50 gm a.i./ha + Acetamiprid 20% SP @ 60 gm a.i./ha (88.68%) followed by Fluxametamide 8.2% + Bifenthrin 7.8% + Acetamiprid 13%@ 28.70 + 27.30 + 45.50 gm a.i./ha (82.09%) at 10th DAS.
All the doses of Fluxametamide 8.2% + Bifenthrin 7.8% + Acetamiprid 13% showed better efficacy compared to the individual applications of Acetamiprid 20% SP @ 60 gm a.i./ha (50.63%), Bifenthrin 10% EC @ 50 gm a.i./ha (44.04%) and Fluxametamide 10% EC @ 40 gm a.i./ha (35.50%) against whitefly of brinjal at 10th day after spray. T4, T6& T7 showed synergistic effect with the synergistic ratio 1.07, 1.13& 1.15 (>1) at 10 DAS, respectively. (Table 6).

Table 7: Effect of different treatments on the infestation of fruit borer in Tomato.
Sr. No.
Treatment Compositions Dosage/ha Fruit damage (%) Per cent reduction over control Colby’s synergistic ratio
Dosage/ha
a.i. (gm) Formulation (gm/ml) 5 DAS 10 DAS 15 DAS % Control
5 DAS % Control
10 DAS % Control
15 DAS 5 DAS 15 DAS
1 Fluxametamide 10% EC 40 400 3.78 (11.19) 5.23 (13.21) 7.36 (15.73) 48.08 50.25 46.73 - -
2 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 500 4.32 (11.98) 5.95 (14.11) 8.44 (16.87) 40.71 43.41 38.91 - -
3 Acetamiprid 20% SP 60 300 5.22 (13.15) 7.22 (15.54) 10.33 (18.72) 28.34 31.34 25.21
4 Fluxametamide 10% EC + Bifenthrin 10% EC + Acetamiprid 20% SP 40 + 50 + 60 400 + 500 + 300 1.21 (6.26) 1.51 (6.99) 2.10 (8.14) 83.38 85.61 84.80 1.07 1.12
5 Fluxametamide 6.5% +Bifenthrin 6.0% +Acetamiprid 10% 22.75 + 21 + 35 350 2.17 (8.37) 3.00 (9.87) 4.34 (12.01) 70.24 71.48 68.59 0.90 0.90
6 Fluxametamide 6.5% +Bifenthrin 6.0% +Acetamiprid 10% 26 + 24 + 40 400 1.93 (7.97) 2.55 (9.15) 3.83 (11.28) 73.53 75.76 72.26 0.94 0.95
7 Fluxametamide 6.5% +Bifenthrin 6.0% +Acetamiprid 10% 29.25 + 27 + 45 450 1.77 (7.62) 2.39 (8.86) 3.50 (10.76) 75.73 77.31 74.67 0.97 0.98
8 Untreated Check - - 7.28 (15.59) 10.52 (18.88) 13.82 (21.79) - - - - -
CD at 5% - - 1.76 2.04 1.95 - - - - -
SE (m) - - 0.57 0.66 0.63 - - - - -
Figure in parenthesis represents angular transformed value; DAS: Days After Spray

Among all the treatments the tank-mix combinations of Fluxametamide 10% EC @ 40 gm a.i./ha + Bifenthrin 10% EC@ 50 gm a.i./ha + Acetamiprid 20% SP@ 60 gm a.i./ha was observed with highest per cent reduction overcontrolof the infestation of fruit borer recorded with 83.38%, 85.61% and84.80% control at 5th, 10th and 15th day after spray, respectively followed by Fluxametamide 6.5% + Bifenthrin 6.0% + Acetamiprid 10% @ 29.25 + 27 + 45 gm a.i./ha, Fluxametamide 6.5% + Bifenthrin 6.0% + Acetamiprid 10% @ 26 + 24 + 40 gm a.i./ha and Fluxametamide 6.5% + Bifenthrin 6.0% + Acetamiprid 10% @ 22.75 + 21 + 35 gm a.i./ha. All the doses of pre-mix formulation of Fluxametamide 6.5% + Bifenthrin 6.0% + Acetamiprid 10%a pplied @ 29.25 + 27 + 45 gm a.i./ha, 26 + 24 + 40 gm a.i./ha and 22.75 + 21 + 35 gm a.i./ha observed with 74.67%, 72.26% and 68.59% reduction over untreated control at 15th DAS, respectively.
All the doses of Fluxametamide 6.5% + Bifenthrin 6.0% + Acetamiprid 10% showed better efficacy compared to the individual applications of Fluxametamide 10% EC @ 40 gm a.i./ha (46.73%), Bifenthrin 10% EC@ 50 gm a.i./ha (38.91%) andAcetamiprid 20% SP @ 60 gm a.i./ha (25.21%) against fruit borer of tomato at 15th day after spray. Among the treatments only tank-mix combination of Fluxametamide 10% EC @ 40 gm a.i./ha + Bifenthrin 10% EC@ 50 gm a.i./ha + Acetamiprid 20% SP@ 60 gm a.i./ha showed synergistic effect with the synergistic ratio 1.12 (>1) at 15 DAS. (Table 7).
Table 8: Effect of different treatments on the infestation of fruit borer in Tomato.
Sr. No.
Treatment Compositions Dosage/ha Fruit damage (%) Per cent reduction over control Colby’s synergistic ratio
Dosage/ha
a.i. (gm) Formulation (gm/ml) 5 DAS 10 DAS 15 DAS % Control
5 DAS % Control
10 DAS % Control
15 DAS 5 DAS 15 DAS
1 Fluxametamide 10% EC 40 400 4.50 (12.23) 5.80 (13.92) 7.73 (16.13) 46.22 49.33 47.52 - -
2 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 500 5.07 (12.98) 6.60 (14.87) 8.81 (17.25) 39.44 42.34 40.22 - -
3 Acetamiprid 20% SP 60 300 5.82 (13.94) 7.72 (16.12) 10.74 (19.12) 30.48 32.59 27.10
4 Fluxametamide 10% EC + Bifenthrin 10% EC + Acetamiprid 20% SP 40 + 50 + 60 400 + 500 + 300 1.29 (6.44) 1.57 (7.14) 2.11 (8.35) 84.58 86.31 85.66 1.09 1.11
5 Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% +Acetamiprid 12% 25.20 + 23.80 + 42 350 2.00 (8.06) 2.33 (8.74) 3.67 (10.85) 76.10 79.62 75.12 0.98 0.97
6 Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% +Acetamiprid 12% 28.80 + 27.20 + 48 400 1.11 (6.03) 1.45 (6.87) 1.56 (7.09) 86.69 87.30 89.44 1.12 1.16
7 Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% +Acetamiprid 12% 32.40 + 30.60 + 54 450 1.08 (5.81) 1.22 (6.29) 1.26 (6.43) 87.13 89.34 91.43 1.12 1.18
8 Untreated Check - - 8.37 (16.74) 11.45 (19.74) 14.74 (22.56) - - - - -
CD at 5% - - 1.61 1.62 1.94 - - - - -
SE (m) - - 0.52 0.53 0.63 - - - - -
Figure in parenthesis represents angular transformed value; DAS: Days After Spray

Among all the doses of combination and individual treatments, Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% + Acetamiprid 12% @ 32.40 + 30.60 + 54 gm a.i./hawas observed with highest per cent reduction overcontrol of fruit borer recorded with 91.43% control at 15th DAS and found at par with Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% + Acetamiprid 12% @ 28.80 + 27.20 + 48 gm a.i./ha (89.44%) and Fluxametamide 10% EC @ 40 gm a.i./ha + Bifenthrin 10% EC @ 50 gm a.i./ha + Acetamiprid 20% SP @ 60 gm a.i./ha (85.66%) followed by Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% + Acetamiprid 12% @ 25.20 + 23.80 + 42 gm a.i./ha (75.12%) at 15th DAS.
All the doses of Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% + Acetamiprid 12% showed better efficacy compared to the individual applications of Fluxametamide 10% EC @ 40 gm a.i./ha (47.52%), Bifenthrin 10% EC@ 50 gm a.i./ha (40.22%) and Acetamiprid 20% SP @ 60 gm a.i./ha (27.10%) against fruit borer of tomato at 15th day after spray. Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% + Acetamiprid 12% @ 28.80 + 27.20 + 48 gm a.i./ha showed synergistic effect with the synergistic ratio 1.16 (>1) at 15 DAS. (Table 8).

Table 9: Effect of different treatments on the infestation of fruit borer in Tomato.
Sr. No.
Treatment Compositions Dosage/ha Fruit damage (%) Per cent reduction over control Colby’s synergistic ratio
Dosage/ha
a.i. (gm) Formulation (gm/ml) 5 DAS 10 DAS 15 DAS % Control
5 DAS % Control
10 DAS % Control
15 DAS 5 DAS 15 DAS
1 Fluxametamide 10% EC 40 400 3.88 (11.35) 5.55 (13.61) 7.44 (15.81) 47.66 51.20 48.74 - -
2 Bifenthrin 10% EC 50 500 4.37 (12.06) 6.32 (14.55) 8.47 (16.91) 41.06 44.43 41.62 - -
3 Acetamiprid 20% SP 60 300 5.26 (13.20) 7.89 (16.30) 10.71 (19.09) 29.11 30.63 26.23
4 Fluxametamide 10% EC + Bifenthrin 10% EC + Acetamiprid 20% SP 40 + 50 + 60 400 + 500 + 300 1.25 (6.36) 1.56 (7.09) 2.22 (8.55) 83.11 86.31 84.68 1.06 1.08
5 Fluxametamide 8.2% + Bifenthrin 7.8% +Acetamiprid 13% 28.70 + 27.30 + 45.50 350 1.62 (7.24) 2.26 (8.57) 3.33 (10.39) 78.12 80.13 77.03 1.00 0.98
6 Fluxametamide 8.2% + Bifenthrin 7.8% +Acetamiprid 13% 32.80 + 31.20 + 52 400 1.00 (5.60) 1.33 (6.46) 1.37 (6.62) 86.52 88.28 90.58 1.10 1.16
7 Fluxametamide 8.2% + Bifenthrin 7.8% +Acetamiprid 13% 36.90 + 35.10 + 58.50 450 0.70 (4.77) 1.00 (5.73) 1.10 (6.00) 90.57 91.21 92.42 1.15 1.18
8 Untreated Check - - 7.42 (15.76) 11.37 (19.69) 14.51 (22.38) - - - - -
CD at 5% - - 1.77 1.76 1.64 - - - - -
SE (m) - - 0.58 0.57 0.53 - - - - -
Figure in parenthesis represents angular transformed value; DAS: Days After Spray

Among all the doses of combination and individual treatments, Fluxametamide 8.2% + Bifenthrin 7.8% + Acetamiprid 13% @ 36.90 + 35.10 + 58.50 gm a.i./hawas observed with highest per cent control of whitefly recorded with 92.42% control and found at par with Fluxametamide 8.2% + Bifenthrin 7.8% + Acetamiprid 13% @ 32.80 + 31.20 + 52 gm a.i./ha (90.58%) and Fluxametamide 10% EC @ 40 gm a.i./ha + Bifenthrin 10% EC @ 50 gm a.i./ha + Acetamiprid 20% SP @ 60 gm a.i./ha (84.68%) followed by Fluxametamide 8.2% + Bifenthrin 7.8% + Acetamiprid 13%@ 28.70 + 27.30 + 45.50 gm a.i./ha (77.03%) at 15th DAS.
All the doses of Fluxametamide 8.2% + Bifenthrin 7.8% + Acetamiprid 13%showed better efficacy compared to the individual applications of Fluxametamide 10% EC @ 40 gm a.i./ha (48.74%), Bifenthrin 10% EC@ 50 gm a.i./ha (41.62%) andAcetamiprid 20% SP @ 60 gm a.i./ha (26.23%) against fruit borer of tomato at 15th day after spray. T4, T6& T7 showed synergistic effect with the synergistic ratio 1.08, 1.16& 1.18 (>1) at 15 DAS, respectively. (Table 9).
Phytotoxicity observations
Various insecticidal compositions of the present invention provided good control of brinjal whitefly as well as tomato fruit borer as compared to the reference products. Further, the use of these insecticidal compositions resulted in better crop condition i.e. fresh green leaves and didn’t produce any phytotoxic symptoms on the plants. Table 8-13 depicts the phytotoxic effects of the various insecticidal compositions of the present invention on brinjal and tomato at 5th, 10th and 15th DAS.

Table 10: Phytotoxic effects of the insecticidal combination of “Fluxametamide 6.5% + Bifenthrin 6.0% + Acetamiprid 10%” on brinjal
Treatments Phytotoxicity rating
Yellowing Wilting Necrosis Epinasty Hyponasty
Days After Spray
5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15
T1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 11: Phytotoxic effects of the insecticidal combination of “Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% + Acetamiprid 12%” on brinjal
Treatments Phytotoxicity rating
Yellowing Wilting Necrosis Epinasty Hyponasty
Days After Spray
5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15
T1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 12: Phytotoxic effects of the insecticidal combination of “Fluxametamide 8.2% + Bifenthrin 7.8% + Acetamiprid 13%” on brinjal
Treatments Phytotoxicity rating
Yellowing Wilting Necrosis Epinasty Hyponasty
Days After Spray
5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15
T1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 13: Phytotoxic effects of the insecticidal combination of “Fluxametamide 6.5% + Bifenthrin 6.0% + Acetamiprid 10%” on tomato
Treatments Phytotoxicity rating
Yellowing Wilting Necrosis Epinasty Hyponasty
Days After Spray
5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15
T1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 14: Phytotoxic effects of the insecticidal combination of “Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% + Acetamiprid 12%” on tomato
Treatments Phytotoxicity rating
Yellowing Wilting Necrosis Epinasty Hyponasty
Days After Spray
5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15
T1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 15: Phytotoxic effects of the insecticidal combination of “Fluxametamide 8.2% + Bifenthrin 7.8% + Acetamiprid 13%on tomato
Treatments Phytotoxicity rating
Yellowing Wilting Necrosis Epinasty Hyponasty
Days After Spray
5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15
T1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Conclusion
After evaluation of three formulations i.e., Fluxametamide 6.5% + Bifenthrin 6.0% + Acetamiprid 10%, Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% + Acetamiprid 12% and Fluxametamide 8.2% + Bifenthrin 7.8% + Acetamiprid 13% at three different doses (350 ml/ ha, 400 ml/ha &450 ml/ha). Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% + Acetamiprid 12%@ 400 ml/ha found to be effective against whitefly of brinjal and fruit borer of tomato crops in comparison to Tank mix formulation (Fluxametamide 10% EC + Bifenthrin 10% EC + Acetamiprid 20% SP) as well as solo treatments (Fluxametamide 10% EC,Bifenthrin 10% EC and Acetamiprid 20% SP). Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% + Acetamiprid 12%@ 400 ml/ha was found at par with higher formulation, higher dose and higher active ingredient.
Therefore, application of Fluxametamide 7.2% + Bifenthrin 6.8% + Acetamiprid 12%@ 400 ml/ha (28.80 + 27.20 + 48 gm a.i./ha) formulation can be recommended for effective control of whitefly in brinjal and fruit borer in tomato crops.
, Claims:
1. An insecticidal composition comprising a synergistic combination of-
a. Fluxametamide in an amount ranging from 0.1% to 30.0% by weight;
b. Bifenthrin is present in an amount ranging from 0.1% to 30.0% by weight;
c. Acetamiprid is present in an amount ranging from 0.1% to 30.0% by weight; and
d. agrochemical acceptable excipient.

2. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein Fluxametamide is present in an amount of 7.2% w/w, Bifenthrin is present in an amount of 6.8% w/w and Acetamiprid is present in an amount of 12 % w/w.

3. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the formulation is selected from a suspension concentrate (SC), flowable suspension for seed treatment (FS), oil dispersion (OD), suspo-emulsion (SE), water-dispersible granule (WDG), or wettable powder (WP).

4. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 1 wherein, the agrochemically acceptable excipient is Dispersing agent, Antifreezing agent, Antifoaming agent, Rheology modifier, Stabilizing agents , PH modifier, Coloring agents , Solvent and Biocide.

5. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the agriculturally accepted excipient is selected from the group comprising dispersing agent; wetting agent; antifoaming agent; rheology modifier; solvent; an antifreezing agent; stabilizing agent; and coloring agent wherein the composition comprises- about 0.1% to about 20.0% dispersing agent; about 0.1% to about 20.0% biocide; about 0.1% to about 15.0% wetting agent; about 0.01% to about 5.0% antifoaming agent; about 0.01% to about 20.0% rheology modifier; about 0% to about 95.0% solvent; about 0% to about 15 % antifreezing agent; about 0% to about 5 % stabilizing agent; and 0.01% to 5.0 % coloring agent.

6. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 4, wherein the dispersing agent is selected from the group comprising polymeric ester dispersant, ethoxylated polyarylphenol phosphate ester, sodium salt of naphthalene sulfonate condensate, acrylic copolymer, nonionic proprietary surfactant blend, polycarboxylates, calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate, aryl sulphonate condensate, sodium lignosulphonate, dispertox BS SPL, polystyrenatedacrylated co-polymer, modified styrene acrylic copolymer, salts of phenol sulfonic acids, Terwet 2700, butyl polyalkylene oxide block co-polymer, mixture of tristyrylphenol ethoxylates and polyalkylene oxide derivative of a synthetic alcohol, random co-polymer of alcoxylated polyethylene glycol or mixtures thereof.

7. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 4, wherein the antifoaming agent is selected from the group comprising polydimethyl siloxane, polydimethyl siloxane emulsion or mixtures thereof.

8. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 4, wherein the rheology modifier is selected from the group comprising precipitated silica, fumed silica, modified fumed silica, bentonite, hydroxymethyl cellulose, carboxymethyl cellulose, xanthan gum, thickening silica, hydrated clay minerals, magnesium aluminium silicates, organic derivative of hectorite clay, hydrophobic fumed silica, polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) or mixture thereof.

9. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 4, wherein the solvent is selected Demineralized (DM) water, N-alkyl-pyrrolidone, oil medium selected from the group comprising, esterified fatty acids selected from methyl and/or ethyl ester of vegetable oil such as methyl soyate, ethyl soyate, rapeseed methyl ester, rapeseed ethyl ester or mixtures thereof.
10. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 4, wherein the antifreezing agent is selected from the group comprising ethylene glycol, 1,2-propanediol, propane-1,2,3-triol, urea or mixtures thereof.

11. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 4, wherein wetting cum dispersing agent is selected from the group comprising of, but not limited to non-ionic proprietary surfactant blend alkylphenol ethoxylates or polyoxyethylene sorbitan esters, lignosulfonates, sodium salt of naphthalene sulfonate condensates, tristyrylphenol ethoxylates.

12. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 4, wherein the stabilizing agent is selected from the group comprising epoxidized soyabean oil, butylated hydroxy toluene, ethylenediamine tetra acetic acid, Precipitated Silica, sodium benzoate, etc. or mixtures thereof.

13. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 4, wherein the Biocide selected from the group comprising of 1,2-benzisothiazolin-3-one, formaldehyde, dipropyl glycol solution of 1,2-benzisothiazolin-3-one or mixtures thereof.

14. The insecticidal composition as claimed in claim 4, wherein the coloring agent is selected from Triaryl methane acid blue, 3-hydroxy-N-(2-methylphenyl)-4-[(E)-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl)diazinyl]-2-naphthamideand Acid Brilliant Green.

15. A process for preparing a Suspension concentrate insecticidal composition comprising the steps of-
• In demineralized dipropylene glycol solution of 1,2-benzisothiazolin-3-one, polydimethylsiloxane emulsion, propane-1,2,3-triol, nonionic proprietary surfactant blend and acrylic copolymeras were added into the clean pre-mixing vessel fitted with the homogenizer to form a uniform premix.
• Add active ingredients—fluxametamide, bifenthrin, acetamiprid—and precipitated silica to the premix.
• Continue homogenizing until a uniform slurry is formed.
• Pass the slurry through a jacketed bead mill with chilled water circulation.
• Aim to achieve a particle size where d(90) is less than 20 microns, ensuring consistency and efficacy in application.
• Transfer the milled slurry to a post-mixing vessel equipped with a stirrer.
• Add a rheology modifier, specifically 2% xanthan gum solution in demineralized water.
• Mix thoroughly until a homogeneous suspension concentrate (SC) is formed.

16. A process for preparing Flowable Suspension (FS) insecticidal composition comprising the steps of-
• In demineralized dipropylene glycol solution of 1,2-benzisothiazolin-3-one, polydimethylsiloxane emulsion, propane-1,2,3-triol, nonionic proprietary surfactant blend and acrylic copolymeras were added into the clean pre-mixing vessel fitted with the homogenizer to mix thoroughly, forming a uniform premix.
• Add active ingredients, fluxametamide, bifenthrin, acetamiprid, precipitated silica and coloring agent added to the premix.
• Continue homogenizing to produce a consistent slurry.
• Pass the slurry through a jacketed bead mill with chilled water circulation.
• Ensure the particle size is reduced to d(90) < 20 microns for uniform distribution and effectiveness.
• Transfer the milled slurry to a post-mixing vessel equipped with a stirrer.
• Add a rheology modifier, specifically 2% xanthan gum solution in demineralized water.
• Mix thoroughly until the xanthan gum is evenly incorporated, forming a homogeneous Flowable Suspension (FS).