DESC:Synergistic Insecticidal Combinations of Cartap
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising the combination of cartap with one or more insecticides in WDG / Solid Granules / Dusts and other related formulations in different percentages. More precisely, the subject matter of the present invention is a synergistic insecticidal composition based on a combination of cartap as a main component with one or more insecticide(s) optionally with at least one agrochemical acceptable excipient which will facilitate in the preparation of desired formulations. The present invention also relates to the process for the preparation of synergistic and broad-spectrum 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. 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. However, liquid formulation and sprays etc., suffer from several disadvantages includes drift of the chemical, spray application has the risk of inhalation to farmers, and water contamination due to overflow. Whereas Granular formulations is an alternative and have considerable advantages such as easy to use and transport the formulation not required special equipment or training, low chemical exposure while application, not depend on weather conditions and avoid contamination and provide convenience and safety to the farmers, control release of ingredients and environmentally compatible formulation. But Granular formulations also have some limitations like compatibility issues, targeted application, and soil conditions which impact the efficiency.
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.
OBJECT 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 present invention provides a novel granular formulation comprising compatible ingredients formulated with suitable inert materials such as sand and clay. Further the present inventors incorporated neem powder and plant nutrients specifically sulfur and zinc to enhance effectiveness of the formulation. By this, the present invention overcomes the disadvantage of granular formulation and provides effective crop protection with improved crop quality and yield.
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.
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 “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 specifically designed to protect crops and kill or control 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.
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 separate 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.
The term “Chlorpyriphos” can be replaced or referred with the word “Chlorpyrifos”.
The term “plant nutrient” can be replaced with the word “nutrient” defined or refers to as chemical elements or compound which is necessary for plant growth and plant health. Plant nutrients are classified into two categories as:
Macronutrients: Nitrogen (N), Phosphorus (P), Potassium (K), Calcium (Ca), Sulfur (S), Magnesium (Mg).
Micronutrients: Iron (Fe), Boron (B), Manganese (Mn), Zinc (Zn), Copper (Cu), Molybdenum (Mo), Nickel (Ni).
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 comprising the combination of cartap with one or more insecticides selected from chlorpyrifos, fipronil and carbofuran 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.
The combination of present invention, whether individually or in combination, can vary depending on the dominant biological and physico-chemical parameters can be 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 for foliar applications or soil applications and seed treatment.
This insecticidal combination can effectively control sucking, chewing, caterpillars, borer insects, soil insects and other insects check the resistance development in insects in several crops. This insecticidal combination is also helpful in controlling insect vectors which transmit viral diseases in plants, and it can also be used in public health and household purposes for pest control. This can be a unique insecticide combination than the existing ones.
The present invention involves the mixture comprising the combination of cartap with one or more insecticides selected from chlorpyrifos, fipronil and carbofuran in granular formulation are described herein thereof.
Nereistoxin has chemical similarity to acetylcholine and its mode of action was suggested originally as being possibly by interference with acetylcholinesterase. Later electrophysiological studies using synapses showed that it acts by blocking the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor / ion channel complex in the insect central nervous system that leads to eventual death of insects.
Cartap having IUPAC name: 2-Dimethylamino-1,3-bis(carbamoylthio)propane; Molecular formula: C7H15N3O2S2 and the structural formula as shown below:

Cartap is contact, non-systemic, broad-spectrum commodity insecticide, is a nereistoxin analogue insecticide, and is reasonably effective at controlling chewing and sucking insect pests and used to control pests like aphids, spidermites, thrips, whiteflies, jassids, etc., The mode of action, i.e., the primary effect of cartap is through inhibition of the [3H]-ryanodine binding to the Ca2+ release channel in the sarcoplasmic reticulum in a dose-dependent manner and promotion of extracellular Ca2+ influx and induction of internal Ca2+ release. It was primarily developed for use on rice. Use has also been broadened to other crop sectors, the most important of which are fruit and vegetables in several markets. It is used mainly for commercial crops like rice, soya beans, peanuts, sunflowers, maize, sugar beet, wheat, pearl barley; fruits including apples, pears, plums, apricots, cherries, citrus; vines, chestnuts, tea, cotton, sugarcane, etc.
Chlorpyrifos is an organophosphate insecticide specifically aryl organo thiophosphate insecticides, acaricide and miticide used primarily to control foliage and soil-borne insect pests having IUPAC name, Phosphorothioic acid O, O-diethyl O-(3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinyl) ester. Chlorpyrifos is contact, non-systemic, broad-spectrum insecticide which kills insects upon contact by affecting the normal function of the nervous system. Chlorpyrifos functions by binding to Acetylcholinesterase (AChE), thereby preventing the breakdown of acetylcholine (a neural signal carrier). Subsequent accumulation of acetylcholine causes overstimulation of nerves which can result in paralysis, seizures, and eventual death of the insect.
Fipronil mainly belongs to phenyl pyrazole insecticides is a systemic, selective insecticide having IUPAC name: 5-amino-1-[2,6-dichloro-4-(trifluoromethyl) phenyl]-4-(trifluoromethylsulfinyl) pyrazole-3-carbonitrile; Molecular formula: C12H4Cl2F6N4OS. Fipronil disrupts the insect central nervous system by blocking the ligand-gated ion channel of the GABA (?-aminobutyric acid) receptor and glutamate-gated chloride (GluCl) channels. Disruption of the GABA receptors by fipronil prevents the uptake of chloride ions resulting in excess neuronal stimulation and death of the target insects. This photoproduct exerts high neurotoxicity by blocking the ?-aminobutyric acid (GABA)-regulated chloride channels. Fortunately, this metabolite is not formed in mammals.
Carbofuran having IUPAC name: 2,2-Dimethyl-7-coumaranyl N-methylcarbamate; Molecular formula: C12H15NO3. Carbofuran is a systemic, broad spectrum carbamate insecticide belongs to class of Carbamate insecticides which inhibits acetylcholinesterase (AChE), which plays a crucial role in the transmission of nerve impulses at autonomic ganglia of the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems of insects. This results in a build-up of acetylcholine in the postsynaptic receptors producing prolonged stimulation of the effector organ of targeted insects. Its primary function is to break down the neurotransmitter acetylcholine (ACh) after it has been released into the synaptic cleft. This breakdown is essential for terminating nerve impulses and preventing continuous stimulation of nerve cells.
The first embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
at least one nereistoxin analogue insecticide; and
at least one insecticide selected from aryl organothiophosphate insecticide and / or pyrazole insecticide and/or carbamate insecticide.
The first aspect of the first embodiment, the nereistoxin analogue insecticide, is selected from the group comprising but not limited to bensultap, cartap, polythialan, thiocyclam, thiosultap.
The second aspect of the first embodiment, the aryl organothiophosphate insecticide is selected from the group comprising but not limited to butathiofos, chlorprazophos, chlorpyrifos, coumaphos, coumithoate, diazinon, etrimfos, flupyrazofos, isazofos, isoxathion, lirimfos, pirimioxyphos, primidophos, pyraclofos, pyrazophos, pyrazothion, pyridaphenthion, pyrimitate, quinalphos, quinothion, tebupirimfos, and triazophos
The third aspect of the first embodiment, the pyrazole insecticide, is selected from the group comprising but not limited to acetoprole, ethiprole, fipronil, flufiprole, pyrafluprole, pyriprole, vaniliprole, dimpropyridaz, and tolfenpyrad.
The fourth aspect of the first embodiment, the carbamate insecticide is selected from the group comprising but not limited to bendiocarb, benfuracarb, carbofuran, carbosulfan, carbaryl, decarbofuran, formetanate, formparanate, and furathiocarb.
The fifth aspect of the first embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of nereistoxin analogue insecticide with at least one insecticide selected from aryl organothiophosphate insecticide and/or pyrazole insecticide and/or carbamate insecticide; wherein nereistoxin analogue insecticide and second insecticide are present in the weight ratio of (1-10):(1-10).
A further aspect of the first embodiment, the combination optionally comprising nutrient and/or neem powder.
The second embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
at least nereistoxin analogue insecticide;
at least one insecticide selected from aryl organothiophosphate insecticide and/or pyrazole insecticide and/or carbamate insecticide; and
at least one agrochemical acceptable excipient.
First aspect of the second embodiment, the nereistoxin analogue insecticide is selected from the group comprising but not limited to bensultap, cartap, polythialan, thiocyclam, thiosultap
The second aspect of the second embodiment, the aryl organothiophosphate insecticide is selected from the group comprising but not limited to butathiofos, chlorprazophos, chlorpyrifos, coumaphos, coumithoate, diazinon, etrimfos, flupyrazofos, isazofos, isoxathion, lirimfos, pirimioxyphos, primidophos, pyraclofos, pyrazophos, pyrazothion, pyridaphenthion, pyrimitate, quinalphos, quinothion, tebupirimfos, and triazophos
The third aspect of the second embodiment, the pyrazole insecticide is selected from the group comprising but not limited to acetoprole, ethiprole, fipronil, flufiprole, pyrafluprole, pyriprole, vaniliprole, dimpropyridaz, and tolfenpyrad.
The fourth aspect of the second embodiment, the carbamate insecticide is selected from the group comprising but not limited to bendiocarb, benfuracarb, carbofuran, carbosulfan, carbaryl, decarbofuran, formetanate, formparanate, and furathiocarb.
The fifth aspect of the second embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of nereistoxin analogue insecticide with at least one insecticide selected from aryl organothiophosphate insecticide and/or pyrazole insecticide and/or carbamate insecticide; wherein nereistoxin analogue insecticide and second insecticide are present in the weight ratio of (1-10):(1-10).
The sixth 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.
The further aspect of the second embodiment, the combination optionally comprising nutrient and/or neem powder.
The further aspect of the second embodiment, carrier selected from but not limited to water, organic solvents incudes hydrocarbon solvents and cycloalkanes, ether solvents, ester solvents, ketones solvents, alcohols solvents and polar-aprotic solvents.
The further aspect of the second embodiment, surfactant includes wetting agent and emulsifier.
The further aspect of the present invention, emulsifier includes anionic emulsifiers, cationic emulsifiers, nonionic emulsifiers, amphoteric emulsifiers, phospholipids, glyceryl esters and other commercially available emulsifiers.
The 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.
The further aspect of the present invention, cationic emulsifiers selected from but not limited to cetyl trimethyl ammonium bromide (CTAB) and stearalkonium chloride.
The 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.
The 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.
The 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.
The further aspect of the second embodiment, stabilizer includes antioxidant, chelating agent, pH adjusters, UV absorber, stabilizing polymers and inert material.
The 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.
The 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.
The 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.
The 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.
The 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.
The further aspect of the second embodiment, dispersing agents selected from but not limited to polyethylene glycol, polysorbate, poly acrylate, poly(methyl methacrylate), polyvinyl alcohol, poly ethoxylated alcohol, poly ethoxylated fatty acids, polyacrylic acid, polyvinylpyrrolidone, alkyl sulfonates, aryl sulfonates, sodium tripolyphosphate, sodium dodecyl sulfate, sodium lignosulfonate, sodium carboxymethyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl methylcellulose, sorbitan esters (e.g., sorbitan monolaurate, sorbitan monooleate), gum arabic and carbomer and/or their comb polymers; preferably poly(methyl methacrylate), polyethylene glycol comb polymer, and other commercially available dispersing agents.
The 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.
The 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.
The 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.
The further aspect of the second embodiment, rheology modifier is bentonite and pH modifiers is triethanolamine and phosphoric acid.
The 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:
cartap;
at least one insecticide selected from chlorpyrifos and/or fipronil and/or carbofuran;
carrier;
nutrient and/or neem powder;
wetting agent;
stabilizer;
inert material;
anti-freezing agent;
dispersing agent; and
adjuvant.
The first aspect of the third embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of cartap and chlorpyrifos; cartap and chlorpyrifos are present in the weight ratio of (1-10):(1-10).
The second aspect of the third embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of cartap and carbofuran; cartap and carbofuran are present in the weight ratio of (1-10):(1-10).
The third aspect of the third embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of cartap and fipronil; cartap and fipronil are present in the weight ratio of (1-10):(1-10).
The fourth aspect of the third embodiment, agrochemical acceptable excipient selected from but not limited to the group comprising liquid medium, wetting agent, anti-freezing agent, antifoaming agent, dispersing agent, and adjuvant. These are selected according to the respective types of formulation requirements, and which will facilitate in the preparation different formulations.
The further aspect of the third embodiment, the combination comprising nutrient and/or neem powder; preferably nutrient is zinc and/or sulfur.
The further aspect of the third embodiment, carrier selected from but not limited to water, organic solvents incudes hydrocarbon solvents and cycloalkanes, ether solvents, ester solvents, ketones solvents, alcohols solvents and polar-aprotic solvents; preferably water and / or n-methyl pyrrolidone.
The 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.
The further aspect of the third embodiment, stabilizer includes antioxidant, chelating agent, pH adjusters, UV absorber, stabilizing polymers, and inert material.
The further aspect of the third 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; preferably epoxidized soyabean oil.
The further aspect of the third 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; preferably silicon oxides, china clay.
The 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 preferably ethylene glycol.
The 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; preferably poly(methyl methacrylate), polyethylene glycol comb polymer, and other commercially available dispersing agents; preferably sodium lignosulfonate.
The further aspect of the third embodiment, adjuvant includes but not limited to colorant, spreader, modifier, sticker, penetrant, drift control agent, buffering agent, thickener, compatibility agent, binders and safener.
The further aspect of the the third embodiment, colorant is color dye selected from natural, synthetic, and commercially available dyes.
The further aspect of the third 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; preferably gum.
The further aspect of the third 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 third embodiment, rheology modifier is bentonite and pH modifiers are triethanolamine and phosphoric acid; preferably phosphoric acid.
The fourth embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
cartap; and
at least one insecticide selected from chlorpyrifos and/or fipronil and/or carbofuran;
water;
n-methyl pyrrolidone;
zinc and sulfur and/or neem powder;
commercially available wetting agent (selected from TERWET, UNITOP PAP, UNITOP PAD and Diasilite White);
epoxidized soyabean oil;
sodium lignosulfonate;
ethylene glycol;
precipitated silica;
gum
dye; and
phosphoric acid.
The first aspect of the fourth embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of cartap and chlorpyrifos and/or fipronil and/or carbofuran; wherein cartap and second insecticide are present in the weight ratio of (1-10):(1-10).
Further aspect of the fourth embodiment, the composition of fourth embodiment is formulated as Granules (GR).
The fifth embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
cartap; and
chlorpyrifos;
The first aspect of the fifth embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of cartap and chlorpyrifos; wherein of cartap and chlorpyrifos are present in the weight ratio of (1-10):(1-10).
The further aspect of the fifth embodiment, the composition of the fifth embodiment comprising at least one agrochemical acceptable excipient(s) thereof which is / are used in preparation desired formulation.
The further aspect of the fifth embodiment, the composition of fifth embodiment is formulated as Granules (GR).
The sixth embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
cartap; and
fipronil;
First aspect of the sixth embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of cartap and fipronil; wherein of cartap and fipronil are present in the weight ratio of (1-10): (1-10).
The further aspect of the sixth embodiment, the composition of the sixth embodiment comprising at least one agrochemical acceptable excipient(s) thereof which is / are used in preparation desired formulation.
The further aspect of the sixth embodiment, the composition of sixth embodiment is formulated as Granules (GR).
The seventh embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
cartap; and
carbofuran;
The first aspect of the seventh embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of cartap and carbofuran; wherein of cartap and carbofuran are present in the weight ratio of (1-10): (1-10).
The further aspect of the seventh embodiment, the composition of the seventh embodiment comprising at least one agrochemical acceptable excipient(s) thereof which is / are used in preparation desired formulation.
The further aspect of the seventh embodiment, the composition of seventh embodiment is formulated as Granules (GR).
Another embodiment of present invention, Granular formulation can be prepared either by spraying the active substances onto compatible inert material or by applying active substance concentrates to the surface of inert material such as sand, china clay with the help of binders. Suitable active substances may also be granulated with suitable other materials like need powder and nutrient in the same manner.
The another embodiment of the present invention, the insecticidal composition obtained from the present invention 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.
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: GRANULAR (GR) FORMULATION OF SYNERGISTIC INSECTICIDAL COMPOSITION OF THE PRESENT INVENTION:
TABLE 1.1:
S. No Ingredient Weight / Weight %
1 Cartap 4.7
2 Chlorpyrifos 5
3 Dye 1
4 Clay 5
5 Sodium lignosulfonate 10
6 Commercially available wetting agent 3
7 Phosphoric acid 1
8 Ethylene glycol 1
9 PPT Silica 2
10 Sand QS
Total 100
TABLE 1.2:
S. No Ingredient Weight / Weight %
1 Cartap 4.7
2 Chlorpyrifos 5
3 Clay 1
4 Epoxidized Soyabean Oil 5
5 NMP 5
6 Commercially available wetting agent 3
7 Ethylene glycol 2
8 PPT Silica 1
9 Neem cake powder QS
Total 100

TABLE 1.3:
S. No Ingredient Weight / Weight %
1 Cartap 4.7
2 Chlorpyrifos 5
3 Clay 1
4 Epoxidized Soyabean Oil 5
5 Sodium lignosulfonate 5
6 Commercially available wetting agent 3
7 Ethylene glycol 2
8 PPT Silica 1
9 Brown dye 0.5
10 Zinc (33%) Sulphate (15%) granules QS
Total 100
TABLE 1.4:
S. No Ingredient Weight / Weight %
1 Cartap 5
2 Carbofuran 4.5
3 Violet Dye 2
4 China Clay 4
5 Sodium lignosulfonate 6
6 PPT Silica 5
7 Commercially available wetting agent 2
8 Epoxidized Soyabean Oil 4
9 Neem cake powder QS
Total 100
TABLE 1.5:
S. No Ingredient Weight / Weight %
1 Cartap 5
2 Carbofuran 4.5
3 Violet Dye 2
4 NMP
5 bentonite clay 4
6 Sodium lignosulfonate 6
7 PPT Silica 5
8 Commercially available wetting agent 2
9 Epoxidized Soyabean Oil 4
10 Zinc(33%) Sulphate(15%) granules QS
Total 100
EXAMPLE 2: BIO EFFICACY AND PHYTOTOXICITY TESTS OF THE PRESENT INVENTION
Presently to evaluate the efficacy of Cartap with other insecticides in Granular formulations against yellow stem borer (Scirpophaga incertuals) on paddy and to test their phytotoxicity on the crop after the combination is evaluated. For evaluation, cartap is tried with three different insecticides for a novel insecticidal combination to test their efficacy against the key pest of paddy i.e., yellow stem borer. The different cartap combinations tried and tested were Cartap + Chlorpyriphos GR, Cartap + Carbofuran GR and Cartap + Fipronil GR. Though all the combinations are granular combinations, the formulation is again composed of different carrier materials viz., Sand, Neem cake powder, Bentonite clay/Clay and Zinc + Sulphur Granules. As sand and clay are common carrier materials, neem cake powder gives us an added advantage as the innate properties of neem are anti-feedant, repellent and anti-fungal. While Zinc and Sulphur could act as additive effect by addressing the common micronutrients deficiencies like Zn.
Along with Cartap 4.7% +Chlorpyriphos 5% as a combination molecule, both the insecticides are tested individually, and the market standards selected were Chlorantraniliprole 0.5% + Thiamethoxam 1% GR and Cartap 7.5% + Emamectin benzoate 0.25% GR. 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 (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 application method followed was sand mixed broadcasting of the granules and two applications were done where first application was done at tillering stage and panicle emerging stage.

Method of Observations:
The observations were taken on the percent dead hearts during tillering stage and percent white ears during panicle emerging stage.
The observations were taken at 7 days, 14 days, and 21 Days after each application.
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 percent dead hearts per plant, percent white ears per plant and then calculated as percent reduction in population over untreated or controlled plot. The parameters are calculated by the following formula –
% Dead hearts = (No.of Dead Hearts in Treatment)/(No.of Dead Hearts in Untreated control) x100
% White ears = (No.of White ears in Treatment)/(No.of White ears in Untreated control) x100
% Reduction =
(%Dead hearts or White ears in control plot-Dead hearts or White ears in treated plot )/(Dead hearts or White ears in control plot)× 100
The effect of these insecticides in combination and alone when applied on paddy crop is assessed based on the yield (quintal per hectare). This parameter defines the crop quality. Along with yield, the number of grains filled per panicle are also calculated.
A close watch on the incidence of associated insect pest – leaf folder whose incidence also happens around the similar time period of yellow stem borer is kept in terms of population count at 7, 14, 21 days after application.
Colby’s Method: The combined effect of pesticidal combinations is the sum of their individual effects. Colby’s method is an approach to evaluate the synergistic, additive, or antagonistic effects due to the interactions of two pesticides as a combination.
Colby’s method calculates expected response, and a ratio is calculated between expected response and observed response.
The formula for expected response is as follows-
E = (A+B)-((A*B)/100)
A represents pesticide 1 and B represents pesticide 2.
The observed response is the actual percent control achieved.
Colby’s ratio = Observed response (O) / Expected response (E).
If the ratio is,
< 1 = Antagonistic effect
= Additive effect
> 1 = Synergistic effect

Table 1: Different Treatment Types of Present Invention:
Treatments Combination Details Dose (Kg/Ha)
T1 Cartap 4.7%+Chlorpyriphos 5% Sand granules 12
T2 Cartap 4.7%+Chlorpyriphos 5% Sand granules 15
T3 Cartap 4.7%+Chlorpyriphos 5% Sand granules 18
T4 Cartap 4.7%+Chlorpyriphos 5% Neem granules 12
T5 Cartap 4.7%+Chlorpyriphos 5% Neem granules 15
T6 Cartap 4.7%+Chlorpyriphos 5% Neem granules 18
T7 Cartap 4.7%+Chlorpyriphos 5% Clay granules 12
T8 Cartap 4.7%+Chlorpyriphos 5% Clay granules 15
T9 Cartap 4.7%+Chlorpyriphos 5% Clay granules 18
T10 Cartap 4.7%+Chlorpyriphos 5% Zn+S granules 12
T11 Cartap 4.7%+Chlorpyriphos 5% Zn+S granules 15
T12 Cartap 4.7%+Chlorpyriphos 5% Zn+S granules 18
T13 Cartap 5% +Fipronil 0.5% sand granules 10
T14 Cartap 5% +Fipronil 0.5% sand granules 12.5
T15 Cartap 5% +Fipronil 0.5% sand granules 15
T16 Cartap 5% +Fipronil 0.5% neem granules 10
T17 Cartap 5% +Fipronil 0.5% neem granules 12.5
T18 Cartap 5% +Fipronil 0.5% neem granules 15
T19 Cartap 5% +Fipronil 0.5% clay granules 10
T20 Cartap 5% +Fipronil 0.5% clay granules 12.5
T21 Cartap 5% +Fipronil 0.5% clay granules 15
T22 Cartap 5% +Fipronil 0.5% Zn+S granules 10
T23 Cartap 5% +Fipronil 0.5% Zn+S granules 12.5
T24 Cartap 5% +Fipronil 0.5% Zn+S granules 15
T25 Cartap 5% +Carbofuran 4.5% sand granules 10
T26 Cartap 5% +Carbofuran 4.5% sand granules 12.5
T27 Cartap 5% +Carbofuran 4.5% sand granules 15
T28 Cartap 5% +Carbofuran 4.5% neem granules 10
T29 Cartap 5% +Carbofuran 4.5% neem granules 12.5
T30 Cartap 5% +Carbofuran 4.5% neem granules 15
T31 Cartap 5% +Carbofuran 4.5% clay granules 10
T32 Cartap 5% +Carbofuran 4.5% clay granules 12.5
T33 Cartap 5% +Carbofuran 4.5% clay granules 15
T34 Cartap 5% +Carbofuran 4.5% Zn+S granules 10
T35 Cartap 5% +Carbofuran 4.5% Zn+S granules 12.5
T36 Cartap 5% +Carbofuran 4.5% Zn+S granules 15
T37 Cartap 4% GR 18.75
T38 Chlorpyriphos 10% GR 10
T39 Fipronil 0.3% GR 10
T40 Carbofuran 3% GR 25
T41 Chlorantraniliprole 0.5% + Thiamethoxam 1% GR 25
T42 Cartap 7.5% + Emamectin Benzoate 0.25% GR 6
T43 Untreated control -
Results:
The efficacy of the insecticide combination of
Cartap 4.7% +Chlorpyriphos 5% GR,
Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% GR,
Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% GR
against stem borer in paddy are explained below,
Example –1: Yellow Stem Borer
Table 2. Efficacy of first application of different Cartap GR formulations against Stem Borer in Paddy.
Treatments Dead Hearts Avg % Reduction Colby’s Ratio
7 DAA 14 DAA 21 DAA
T1 2.50 5 5.2 4.23 85.23 1.80
T2 1.40 2 2.2 1.87 93.49 1.97
T3 0.8 1 1.2 1.00 96.51 2.04
T4 0 0.8 2 0.93 96.74 2.04
T5 0 0.6 1.8 0.80 97.21 2.05
T6 0 0 1 0.33 98.84 2.09
T7 0.8 1.2 3.1 1.70 94.07 1.99
T8 1.1 1.4 2.8 1.77 93.84 1.98
T9 1.3 1.7 2.4 1.80 93.72 1.98
T10 0.4 0.7 1.8 0.97 96.63 2.04
T11 0.2 0.4 1.3 0.63 97.79 2.07
T12 0 0 0.4 0.13 99.53 2.10
T13 2.50 5 5.2 4.23 85.23 1.93
T14 2.09 2.8 3.2 2.70 90.59 2.05
T15 1.25 1.78 2.34 1.79 93.76 2.12
T16 0.8 1.4 2.6 1.60 94.42 2.14
T17 0.5 1 2.3 1.27 95.58 2.16
T18 0.4 0.8 1.4 0.87 96.98 2.20
T19 1.2 1.6 3.5 2.10 92.67 2.10
T20 1.5 1.8 3.2 2.17 92.44 2.09
T21 1.7 2.3 2.8 2.27 92.09 2.09
T22 0.8 1.1 2.2 1.37 95.23 2.16
T23 0.2 0.5 1.5 0.73 97.44 2.21
T24 0.2 0.8 1.4 0.80 97.21 2.20
T25 3.76 5.43 7.21 5.47 80.93 2.14
T26 2.40 3.7 4.2 3.43 88.02 2.33
T27 1.8 2 3.2 2.33 91.86 2.43
T28 3 4 6 4.33 84.88 2.25
T29 1.5 3 4.8 3.10 89.19 2.36
T30 0.7 1.8 2 1.50 94.77 2.51
T31 2.78 3.2 5.1 3.69 87.12 2.31
T32 2.4 3 4 3.13 89.07 2.36
T33 1.43 2 3.3 2.24 92.17 2.44
T34 2 3.4 4.2 3.20 88.84 2.35
T35 1.2 2.8 3.6 2.53 91.16 2.41
T36 0 1 3 1.33 95.35 2.52
T37 8 19 32 19.67 31.40 0.73
T38 11 26 29 22.00 23.26 0.49
T39 12 27 31 23.33 18.60 0.42
T40 15 29 34 26.00 9.30 0.25
T41 5.8 7 7.5 6.77 76.40 2.02
T42 6.7 7.8 8 7.50 73.84 1.95
T43 17 26 43 28.67 0.00 0.00
The insecticide combination is applied once the stem borer population reaches ETL in the paddy crop i.e., 1 dead heart per hill. The insecticide is granular formulation, and the granules are applied after mixing with sand through broadcasting as per recommended application rate. The insecticide is applied twice (tillering stage and panicle emergence stage) and observations were recorded 7, 14, 21 days after application. The results after first application showed us that at tillering stage the infestation of dead hearts varied vividly among the treatments. The percent reduction in dead hearts infestation in overall treatments is explained in three major aspects based on the insecticidal mixture i.e., Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% GR, Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% GR and Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% GR and these combinations are further diversified based on carrier material in granules. So, the results are concisely explained as follows.
In case of Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% GR combination, the maximum reduction in dead hearts percent was observed in the treatments Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% Zn+S GR @ 18 kg/ha (99.53%) with colby ratio as 2.10 followed by Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% Neem Gr @ 18 kg/ha (98.84%) with Colby ratio 2.09. The next best treatments were Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% Zn+S GR @ 15 kg/ha (97.79%) and Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% neem GR @ 15 kg/ha (97.21%) which are significantly at par with similar effect. These were followed by Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% neem GR @ 12 kg/ha (96.74%), Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% Zn+S GR @ 12 kg/ha (96.63%) and Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% sand GR @ 18 kg/ha (96.51%) which were all at par with each other. The remaining treatments recorded a reduction of = 95% though all treatments recorded Colby ratio of > 1.8 shows a clear indication of synergistic activity in the combination. The lowest reduction is recorded in solo effect Cartap 4% GR @ 18.75kg/ha with 31.40% and Chlorpyriphos 10% GR @ 10kg/ha with 23.26%.
In case of Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% GR combination, the maximum reduction in dead hearts percent was observed in the treatments Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% Zn+S GR @ 12.5 kg/ha (97.44%) with colby ratio as 2.21 which was at par with Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% Zn+S GR @ 15 kg/ha (97.21%) with Colby ratio 2.20. The next best treatments were Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% neem GR @ 15 kg/ha (96.98%). While the remaining treatments recorded a reduction of = 95% though all treatments recorded Colby ratio of > 1.9 shows a clear indication of synergistic activity in the combination. The lowest reduction is recorded in solo effect Cartap 4% GR @ 18.75kg/ha with 31.40% and Fipronil 0.3% GR with 18.60%.
In case of Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% GR combination, the maximum reduction in dead hearts percent was observed in the treatments Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% Zn+S GR @ 15 kg/ha (95.35%) with colby ratio as 2.52 followed by Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% neem GR @ 15 kg/ha (94.77%) with Colby ratio 2.51. The next best treatments were Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% clay GR @ 15 kg/ha (92.17%) followed by Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% Zn+S GR @ 12.5 kg/ha (91.16%) which are significantly at par with Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% sand GR @ 15 kg/ha (91.86%) were at par with similar effect. The remaining treatments recorded a reduction of = 90% though all treatments recorded colby ratio of > 2 shows a clear indication of synergistic activity in the combination. The lowest reduction is recorded in solo effect Cartap 4% GR @ 18.75kg/ha with 31.40% and Carbofuran 3% GR @ 25kg/ha with 9.30%.
After entire first application the percent reduction in dead hearts in market standards recorded higher infestation of dead hearts with reduction percent ie., 76.40%, 73.84% in Chlorantraniliprole 0.5% + Thiamethoxam 1% GR @ 10,000 g/ha and Cartap 7.5% + Emamectin Benzoate 0.25% GR @ 10,000 g/ha.
Table 3. Efficacy of second application of different Cartap GR formulations against Stem Borer in Paddy.
Treatments White ears Avg % Reduction Colby’s Ratio
7 DAA 14 DAA 21 DAA
T1 3.00 2.7 3 2.90 76.49 1.62
T2 1.70 1.9 2.3 1.97 84.05 1.78
T3 0.9 1.14 1.5 1.18 90.43 1.91
T4 0 0.78 1.89 0.89 96.90 2.05
T5 0 0.58 1.65 0.74 97.41 2.06
T6 0 0 0.8 0.27 99.07 2.10
T7 1.8 1 3 1.93 93.26 1.97
T8 1.05 1.7 2.35 1.70 94.07 1.99
T9 1 1.5 2.37 1.62 94.34 2.00
T10 1.2 0.9 1.67 1.26 95.62 2.02
T11 0.7 0.3 1.14 0.71 97.51 2.06
T12 0 0 0.3 0.10 99.65 2.11
T13 3.40 3.6 4 3.67 87.21 3.40
T14 2.00 2.5 3 2.50 91.28 2.00
T15 1.5 1.74 2.5 1.91 93.33 1.5
T16 1 1.67 2.54 1.74 93.94 1
T17 0.8 1.5 2.65 1.65 94.24 2.51
T18 0.4 1 2.9 1.43 95.00 2.53
T19 2.24 2.78 3.4 2.81 90.21 2.40
T20 1.45 2.17 2.87 2.16 92.45 2.46
T21 1.4 2 2.88 2.09 92.70 2.47
T22 2.6 3.5 3.89 3.33 88.38 2.35
T23 1.1 1.7 2.13 1.64 94.27 2.51
T24 0 0.4 1.13 0.51 98.22 2.62
T25 2.00 4 7 4.33 84.88 2.48
T26 2.00 3 7 4.00 86.05 2.51
T27 1.2 3.66 4.7 3.19 88.88 2.59
T28 2 4.32 5.67 4.00 86.06 2.51
T29 1.5 2.78 4.66 2.98 89.60 2.61
T30 1.2 2.14 3.42 2.25 92.14 2.69
T31 1.8 3.9 5 3.57 87.56 2.55
T32 1.45 3.45 4.56 3.15 89.00 2.60
T33 1.23 2 3.31 2.18 92.40 2.69
T34 2.1 3.4 4.2 3.23 88.72 2.59
T35 1.6 2.3 3.24 2.38 91.70 2.67
T36 0.8 1.4 2.5 1.57 94.53 2.76
T37 12 18 30 20.00 30.23 0.78
T38 14 19 32 21.67 24.42 0.49
T39 18 23 36 25.67 10.47 0.28
T40 19 27 35 27.00 5.81 0.17
T41 4.3 5.2 6 5.17 80.13 2.34
T42 5 6 7 6.00 76.92 2.24
T43 11 24 43 26.00 0.00 0.00
The second application of the insecticidal combination done at panicle emergence stage recorded results In Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% GR combination, the maximum reduction in white ears percent was observed in the treatments Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% Zn+S GR @ 18 kg/ha (99.65%) with colby ratio as 2.11 followed by Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% neem GR @ 18 kg/ha (99.07%) with Colby ratio 2.10. The next best treatments were Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% Zn+S GR @ 15 kg/ha (97.51%) and Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% neem GR @ 15 kg/ha (97.41%) which are significantly at par with similar effect. These were followed by Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% neem GR @ 12 kg/ha (96.90%), Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% Zn+S GR @ 12 kg/ha (95.62%). The remaining treatments recorded reduction < 95% though all treatments recorded Colby ratio of > 1.6 shows a clear indication of synergistic activity in the combination. The lowest reduction is recorded in solo effect Cartap 4% GR @ 18.75kg/ha with 30.23% and Chlorpyriphos 10% GR @ 10kg/ha with 24.42%.
In case of Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% GR combination, the maximum reduction in white ears percent was observed in the treatments Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% Zn+S GR @ 15 kg/ha (98.22%) with colby ratio as 2.62 which was at par with Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% Zn+S GR @ 12.5 kg/ha (94.27%) with colby ratio as 2.51. The next best treatments were Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% neem GR @ 15 kg/ha (95%). While the remaining treatments recorded reduction < 95% though all treatments recorded Colby ratio of > 1 shows a clear indication of synergistic activity in the combination. The lowest reduction is recorded in solo effect Cartap 4% GR @ 18.75kg/ha with 30.23% and Fipronil 0.3% GR with 10.47%.
In case of Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% GR combination, the maximum reduction in white ears percent was observed in the treatments Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% ZN+S GR @ 15 kg/ha (94.53%) with colby ratio as 2.76 followed by Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% neem GR @ 15 kg/ha (91.70%) with Colby ratio 2.67. The next best treatments were Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% clay GR @ 15 kg/ha (92.40%) followed by Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% Zn+S GR @ 12.5 kg/ha (89%). The remaining treatments recorded colby ratio of > 2 shows a clear indication of synergistic activity in the combination. The lowest reduction is recorded in solo effect Cartap 4% GR @ 18.75kg/ha with 30.23% and Carbofuran 3% GR @ 25kg/ha with 5.81%.
After entire first application the percent reduction in dead hearts in market standards recorded higher infestation of white ears with reduction percent ie., 80.13%, 76.92% in Chlorantraniliprole 0.5% + Thiamethoxam 1% GR @ 10,000 g/ha and Cartap 7.5% + Emamectin Benzoate 0.25% GR @ 10,000 g/ha.
Table 4. Effect of different Cartap GR formulations on leaf folder population in Paddy.
Treatments Leaf folder Avg % Reduction
7 DAA 14 DAA 21 DAA
T1 2 6 9 5.67 75.36
T2 1 3 7 3.67 84.06
T3 0.7 3 5 2.90 87.39
T4 0.4 0.8 1.5 0.90 96.09
T5 0.3 1.2 1.5 1.00 95.65
T6 0 0.4 0.8 0.40 98.26
T7 0.2 0.8 1.14 0.71 96.90
T8 0 0.7 1.23 0.64 97.20
T9 0 0.89 1.34 0.74 96.77
T10 0 0.5 1.8 0.77 96.67
T11 0 1 1.2 0.73 96.81
T12 0 0 0.8 0.27 98.84
T13 2.4 7.54 10.65 6.86 70.16
T14 1.4 3.5 7 3.97 82.75
T15 1.1 3 5 3.03 86.81
T16 0.8 0.8 1.5 1.03 95.51
T17 0.7 1.2 1.5 1.13 95.07
T18 0 0.4 0.8 0.40 98.26
T19 0.4 1.2 1.56 1.05 95.42
T20 0.3 0.7 1.23 0.74 96.77
T21 0 0.89 1.34 0.74 96.77
T22 0.5 1.3 1.8 1.20 94.78
T23 0 1.45 1.62 1.02 95.55
T24 0 0.4 0.8 0.40 98.26
T25 2.4 7.65 10.32 6.79 70.48
T26 1.21 3.43 8.44 4.36 81.04
T27 0.8 4.12 5.32 3.41 85.16
T28 0.5 1.23 1.77 1.17 94.93
T29 0.5 1.12 1.32 0.98 95.74
T30 0 0.5 0.7 0.40 98.26
T31 1.4 2 2.47 1.96 91.49
T32 1 1.7 3.45 2.05 91.09
T33 0 2.89 2.34 1.74 92.42
T34 1.2 2.5 4 2.57 88.84
T35 1 2 3 2.00 91.30
T36 0.4 0 0.8 0.40 98.26
T37 3 5 6 4.67 79.71
T38 3 5 7 5.00 78.26
T39 4 6 7 5.67 75.36
T40 4 7 11 7.33 68.12
T41 5 9 10 8.00 65.22
T42 6 7 11 8.00 65.22
T43 11 24 34 23.00 0.00
In the case of Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% GR combination, the maximum reduction in leaf folder infestation percent was observed in the treatments Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% Zn+S GR @ 18 kg/ha (98.84%) with 0.27 leaf folder per plant followed by Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% neem GR @ 18 kg/ha (98.26%) with average 0.40 leaf folder/plant. The next best treatments were Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% Zn+S GR @ 15 kg/ha (96.81%), Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% clay GR @ 18 kg/ha (96.77%), Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% Zn+S GR @ 12 kg/ha (96.67%) and Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% neem GR @ 12 kg/ha (96.09%) which were all at par with each other. The remaining treatments recorded a reduction of = 95%. The lowest reduction is recorded in solo effect Cartap 4% GR @ 18.75kg/ha with 79.71% and Chlorpyriphos 10% GR @ 10kg/ha with 78.26%.
In case of Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% GR combination, the maximum reduction in leaf folder infestation percent was observed in the treatments Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% Zn+S GR @ 15 kg/ha (98.26%) with an average 0.40 leaf folder/plant which was at par with Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% neem GR @ 15 kg/ha (98.26%). The next best treatments were Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% clay GR @ 15 kg/ha (96.77%) which was at par with Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% clay GR @ 12.5 kg/ha (96.77%). While the remaining treatments recorded a reduction of = 95% and lowest reduction is recorded in solo effect Cartap 4% GR @ 18.75kg/ha with 79.71% and Fipronil 0.3% GR with 75.36%.
In case of Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% GR combination, the maximum reduction in leaf folder infestation percent was observed in the treatments Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% Zn+S GR @ 15 kg/ha, Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% neem GR @ 15 kg/ha recorded same result (98.26%) with an average leaf folder population of 0.40 leaf folder per plant followed by Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% neem GR @ 12.5 kg/ha (95.74%) and Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% neem GR @ 10 kg/ha (94.93%). The remaining treatments recorded a reduction of = 90% and the lowest reduction is recorded in solo effect Cartap 4% GR @ 18.75kg/ha with 79.71% and Carbofuran 3% GR @ 25kg/ha with 68.12%.
After entire pesticidal application the percent reduction in leaf folder infestation in market standards recorded low ie., 65.22% in Chlorantraniliprole 0.5% + Thiamethoxam 1% GR @ 10,000 g/ha and Cartap 7.5% + Emamectin Benzoate 0.25% GR @ 10,000 g/ha.

Table 5. Effect of different Cartap GR formulations on yield in Paddy.
Treatments Yield Parameters Yield % Increase in Yield
(over control)
Unfilled Grains (%) Filled Grains (%)
T1 18 82 44.47 30.79
T2 16 84 45.67 34.32
T3 12 88 47.7 40.29
T4 14 86 44.3 30.29
T5 11 89 47.65 40.15
T6 9 91 49 44.12
T7 17 83 42 23.53
T8 14 86 44 29.41
T9 13 87 45 32.35
T10 16 84 41 20.59
T11 15 85 43 26.47
T12 12 88 46 35.29
T13 22 78 41 20.59
T14 18 82 43.21 27.09
T15 14 86 44.32 30.35
T16 16 84 42 23.53
T17 13 87 44.8 31.76
T18 11 89 45 32.35
T19 21 79 42 23.53
T20 17 83 41.34 21.59
T21 16 84 40.8 20.00
T22 19 81 41 20.59
T23 18 82 43 26.47
T24 15 85 45 32.35
T25 14 86 44.32 30.35
T26 19 81 41.12 20.94
T27 17 83 43.32 27.41
T28 13.45 86.55 45.6 34.12
T29 15.76 84.24 44.09 29.68
T30 12.34 87.66 45.31 33.26
T31 12 88 47 38.24
T32 16 84 40 17.65
T33 15 85 42.45 24.85
T34 14 86 43 26.47
T35 17 83 40.11 17.97
T36 14 86 42.12 23.88
T37 14 86 45.57 34.03
T38 22 78 36.54 7.47
T39 23 77 38 11.76
T40 27 73 37 8.82
T41 34 66 40 17.65
T42 41 59 38 11.76
T43 72 28 34 0.00

The qualitative and quantitative yield of paddy recorded in different treatments as shown in the table above (Table 5.) implies that the combination molecules positively affected the yield of the crop by recording high percent of filled grains and yield. The percent grain filling was evidently high in all the combination treatments which varied in between 82% -91% in Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% GR, 78% - 89% in Cartap 4% + Fipronil 0.5% GR and 81%-88% in Cartap 4% + Carbofuran 5.5% GR. The lowest grain filling was observed in market standards i.e., 66% and 59% in Chlorantraniliprole 0.5% + Thiamethoxam 1% GR @ 10,000 g/ha and Cartap 7.5% + Emamectin Benzoate 0.25% GR @ 10,000 g/ha.
In case of Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% GR combination, the maximum yield was recorded in Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% neem GR @ 18 kg/ha (49q/ha) with 44.12% increase in yield which is followed by Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% neem GR @ 15 kg/ha (47.65 q/ha) which was at par with Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% sand GR @ 18 kg/ha (47.7 q/ha) and Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% Zn+S GR @ 18 kg/ha (46 q/ha). In the case of Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% GR combination, the the maximum yield was observed in the treatments Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% Zn+S GR @ 15 kg/ha, Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% neem GR @ 15 kg/ha (32.35 q/ha). The next best treatments were Cartap 5% + Fipronil 0.5% neem GR @ 12.5 kg/ha (44.32 q/ha). While the remaining treatments recorded less yield in comparative. For Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% GR combination, the maximum yield was observed in the treatments Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% sand GR @ 18 kg/ha(47 q/ha) followed by Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% neem GR @ 15 kg/ha (94.77%) with Colby ratio 2.51. The next best treatments were Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% clay GR @ 15 kg/ha (92.17%) followed by Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% neem GR @ 10 kg/ha (45.6 q/ha), Cartap 5% + Carbofuran 4.5% neem GR @ 15 kg/ha (45.31 q/ha).
After entire experimental study the yield recorded in solo molecules was lesser than the combinations viz., Cartap 4% GR (45.57 q/ha), Chlopyriphos 10% GR (36.54 q/ha), Fipronil 0.3% GR (38 q/ha), and Carbofuran 3% GR (37 q/ha) while market standards recorded ie., 40q/ha and 38q/ha in Chlorantraniliprole 0.5% + Thiamethoxam 1% GR @ 10,000 g/ha and Cartap 7.5% + Emamectin Benzoate 0.25% GR @ 10,000 g/ha.
Table 6. Phytotoxicity of different Cartap GR formulations on Paddy
Treatments Days Visual Rating Scale
Yellowing Necrosis Wilting Vein
Clearing Leaf Tip / Margin Dying Stunting / Dwarfing
T1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T6 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T7 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T8 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T9 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T10 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T11 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T12 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T13 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T14 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T15 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T16 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T17 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T18 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T19 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T20 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T21 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T22 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T23 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T24 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T25 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T26 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T27 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T28 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T29 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T30 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T31 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T32 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T33 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T34 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T35 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T36 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T37 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T38 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T39 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T40 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T41 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
T42 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Untreated Check 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
The phytotoxicity effect of the insecticide combination i.e., Cartap 4.7% + Chlorpyriphos 5% GR, Cartap + Carbofuran and Cartap + Fipronil GR 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.
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 nereistoxin analogue insecticide;
(b) at least one insecticide selected from aryl
organothiophosphate insecticide and / or pyrazole
insecticide and / or carbamate insecticide; and
(c) at least one agrochemical acceptable excipient.
2. The composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the nereistoxin analogue insecticide is bensultap, cartap, polythialan, thiocyclam, thiosultap.
3. The composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the aryl organothiophosphate insecticide is butathiofos, chlorprazophos, chlorpyrifos, coumaphos, coumithoate, diazinon, etrimfos, flupyrazofos, isazofos, isoxathion, lirimfos, pirimioxyphos, primidophos, pyraclofos, pyrazophos, pyrazothion, pyridaphenthion, pyrimitate, quinalphos, quinothion, tebupirimfos, triazophos.
4. The composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the pyrazole insecticide is acetoprole, ethiprole, fipronil, flufiprole, pyrafluprole, pyriprole, vaniliprole, dimpropyridaz, tolfenpyrad.
5. The composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the carbamate insecticide is bendiocarb, benfuracarb, carbofuran, carbosulfan, carbaryl, decarbofuran, formetanate, formparanate, furathiocarb.
6. The composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the formulation for the above said composition is selected from 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.
7. The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein cartap and chlorpyrifos are formulated in Granules (GR) with the weight ratio of (1-10):(1-10).
8. The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein cartap and fipronil are formulated in Granules (GR) with the weight ratio of (1-10):(1-10).
9. The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein cartap and carbofuran are formulated in Granules (GR) with the weight ratio of (1-10):(1-10).
10. The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein the insecticidal composition is used to control and destroys insect pests on several crops by applying effective amount of insecticidal composition provide improved crop yield and quality.