Description:FIELD OF THE INVENTION
[0001] The present disclosure relates to an adjuvant composition for a pesticide. The present disclosure also relates to a process for preparation of an adjuvant composition for a pesticide.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
[0002] 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.
[0003] Adjuvants are used in combination with pesticide formulations to enhance the efficacy of the active ingredient (AI) in the formulation. Adjuvants achieve this by improving the emulsifying, dispersing, initial spray droplet size & evaporation rate, foliar droplet retention, spreading, wetting, solubilizing, evaporating or surface- modifying properties of the pesticide formulation. A desire to improve the efficiency and efficacy of pesticides has led to continued development in adjuvant technology over the decades.
[0004] Adjuvants may be added to a pesticide formulation during the production of the pesticide formulation, or mixed with the pesticide formulation, e.g., in a spray tank, by the user prior to application of the pesticide formulation to a crop. Common adjuvants include surfactants, compatibility agents, anti-foaming agents, petroleum spray oils and drift control polymers.
[0005] Surfactants are agents which improve the emulsifying, dispersing, spreading, wetting, or other surface tension related properties of liquids. Surfactants achieve these effects because of their amphiphilic chemical structures. Surfactants are generally utilized in adjuvant compositions to increase the spray coverage of the pesticide formulation on 25 foliage. This assists in the uptake of the pesticide into crops. Surfactants include emulsifying agents, wetting agents (spreaders), and some stickers.
[0006] Paraffin oil, such as HMO, has been used for many years in the formulation of agriculture sector as insecticides and acaricides to protect crops.
[0007] Apart from above, paraffin oils are also be used as adjuvants with active insecticidal, fungicidal and herbicidal substances. These adjuvants are used to enhance the efficacy of various pest control formulations by enhancing the penetration of active ingredients and reducing evaporation of spray droplets with additional benefits of negligible toxicity and excellent effectiveness in controlling certain pests without developing resistance in them.
[0008] Petroleum spray oils (PSOs) have long been used as adjuvants for pesticides. A PSO usually consists of up to about 5% surfactant suspended in an oil of petroleum origin. This small amount of surfactant allows the PSO to be dispersed in water as an emulsion. PSOs can offer benefits in droplet drift control, evaporation, deposition, wetting, spreading, cuticular penetration and rain fastness. The petroleum oil type and the surfactant type and level in the PSO formulation can all affect the efficacy of an AI.
[0009] A main mode-of-action of PSO adjutancy arises through the ability of the petroleum oil to improve the permeation of the leaf cuticle by the AI by softening or swelling the cuticular structure.
[0010] The low volatility of petroleum oils can contribute to another mode-of-action of PSO adjutancy by maintaining the droplet deposit in a liquid state on the leaf surface for long periods of time following water evaporation from the droplet.
[0011] PSO formulations have shelf-lives limited by the solubility of the surfactant in the oil. It is usually difficult to formulate PSOs on low concentrations of surfactant when the surfactant's solubility in the oil is limiting. The surfactant selected for a PSO formulation must therefore be of sufficient solubility, or must self-assemble into oil soluble agglomerates, to impart adequate shelf-life to the PSO, as well as being capable of producing an emulsion of satisfactory stability when the PSO is added to water.
[0012] Crop oil concentrates (COCs) are also known in the adjuvant market. COCs contain about 75 to 90% petroleum or vegetable-derived oil and about 10 to 25% surfactant.
[0013] The high level of surfactants in COCs allows them to be used at lower rates in the tank mixture than PSOs and in some situations can also promote better AI efficacy than PSOs. An excess level of surfactants is required to maintain the reduction in the droplet/leaf interfacial tension as the droplet spreads. If excess surfactant is present, then dilution of the effective concentration of surfactant at the advancing front of the droplet can be prevented and surfactant lost by adsorption to the leaf surface can be replenished.
[0014] Another advantage of some COCs is the ability of the surfactant to solubilize the plant cuticle thereby facilitating the passage of the AI through this barrier.
[0015] More recently, COCs have been used in place of PSOs as adjuvants in herbicide spray mixtures.
[0016] A range of surfactants have been used in PSO and COC compositions. Most surfactants used are nonionic but other formulations can be made with ionic surfactants or a mixture of ionic and nonionic surfactants. The hydrophilic aspect of nonionic surfactants is often achieved by the inclusion of ethylene or propylene oxide subunits in the surfactant structure while the hydrophobicity can be achieved from long hydrocarbon chains. The chemistry of the hydrophilic and hydrophobic sections of the surfactant molecule influences not only the mixing of the oil with the water, but also the composition's shelf-life, and the persistence of the formulation on the leaf (leaf persistence), cuticular penetration rate and tank-mix compatibility of the PSO or COC. The type of surfactant used in a PSO, or COC formulation is therefore very important and can have a major effect on its overall performance.
[0017] The drawbacks of the prior art documents includes that by using chemical pesticides on plants may cause acute and chronic toxicity, carcinogenicity, and other negative effects on the humans and animals that come into contact with them. Humans and animals who consume produce that has been treated with or has come in contact with conventional pesticides, as well those humans and animals who are exposed to the environmental conditions the pesticides leave behind, are at risk. Additionally, strains of pesticide resistant insects are increasing at alarming rates, rendering chemical treatments less, or even completely ineffective for agricultural purposes.
[0018] Thus, there is a need to develop an adjuvant composition for a pesticide which is safe and environmental friendly to control the various pests effective.

OBJECTS OF THE INVENTION
[0019] An objective of the present invention is to provide an adjuvant composition for a pesticide.
[0020] Another objective of the present invention is to provide a process for preparation of an adjuvant composition for a pesticide.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
[0021] This summary is provided to introduce a selection of concepts in a simplified form that are further described below in Detailed Description section. This summary is not intended to identify key features or essential features of the claimed subject matter, nor is it intended to be used as an aid in determining the scope of the claimed subject matter.
[0022] The present disclosure discloses an adjuvant composition for a pesticide comprising: 95-99 % w/w of a petroleum oil of the total wt. of the composition; and 1-5 % w/w of a surfactant of the total wt. of the composition.
[0023] The present disclosure discloses a process for preparation of an adjuvant composition for a pesticide comprising: mixing of 95-99 % w/w of a petroleum oil of the total wt. of the composition with 1-5 % w/w of a surfactant of the total wt. of the composition to obtain an adjuvant composition for a pesticide.
[0024] Various objects, features, aspects and advantages of the inventive subject matter will become more apparent from the following detailed description of preferred embodiments.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
[0025] The following is a detailed description of embodiments of the disclosure. The embodiments are in such detail as to clearly communicate the disclosure. However, the amount of detail offered is not intended to limit the anticipated variations of embodiments; on the contrary, the intention is to cover all modifications, equivalents, and alternatives falling within the spirit and scope of the present disclosure as defined by the appended claims.
[0026] Unless the context requires otherwise, throughout the specification which follow, the word “comprise” and variations thereof, such as, “comprises” and “comprising” are to be construed in an open, inclusive sense that is as “including, but not limited to.”
[0027] 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. It should also be noted that the term “or” is generally employed in its sense including “and/or” unless the content clearly dictates otherwise.
[0028] In some embodiments, the numbers expressing quantities of ingredients, properties such as concentration, reaction conditions, and so forth, used to describe and claim certain embodiments of the invention are to be understood as being modified in some instances by the term “about.” Accordingly, in some embodiments, the numerical parameters set forth in the written description are approximations that can vary depending upon the desired properties sought to be obtained by a particular embodiment. In some embodiments, the numerical parameters should be construed in light of the number of reported significant digits and by applying ordinary rounding techniques. Notwithstanding that the numerical ranges and parameters setting forth the broad scope of some embodiments of the invention are approximations, the numerical values set forth in the specific examples are reported as precisely as practicable.
[0029] The recitation of ranges of values herein is merely intended to serve as a shorthand method of referring individually to each separate value falling within the range. Unless otherwise indicated herein, each individual value is incorporated into the specification as if it is individually recited herein.
[0030] All processes described herein can be performed in any suitable order unless otherwise indicated herein or otherwise clearly contradicted by context. The use of any and all examples, or exemplary language (e.g. “such as”) provided with respect to certain embodiments herein is intended merely to better illuminate the invention and does not pose a limitation on the scope of the invention otherwise claimed. No language in the specification should be construed as indicating any non-claimed element essential to the practice of the invention.
[0031] The headings and abstract of the invention provided herein are for convenience only and do not interpret the scope or meaning of the embodiments.
[0032] The following discussion provides many example embodiments of the inventive subject matter. Although each embodiment represents a single combination of inventive elements, the inventive subject matter is considered to include all possible combinations of the disclosed elements. Thus if one embodiment comprises elements A, B, and C, and a second embodiment comprises elements B and D, then the inventive subject matter is also considered to include other remaining combinations of A, B, C, or D, even if not explicitly disclosed.
[0033] All publications herein are incorporated by reference to the same extent as if each individual publication or patent application were specifically and individually indicated to be incorporated by reference. Where a definition or use of a term in an incorporated reference is inconsistent or contrary to the definition of that term provided herein, the definition of that term provided herein applies and the definition of that term in the reference does not apply.
[0034] Groupings of alternative elements or embodiments of the invention disclosed herein are not to be construed as limitations. Each group member can be referred to and claimed individually or in any combination with other members of the group or other elements found herein. One or more members of a group can be included in, or deleted from, a group for reasons of convenience and/or patentability. When any such inclusion or deletion occurs, the specification is herein deemed to contain the group as modified thus fulfilling the written description that follows, and the embodiments described herein, is provided by way of illustration of an example, or examples, of particular embodiments of the principles and aspects of the present disclosure. These examples are provided for the purposes of explanation, and not of limitation, of those principles and of the disclosure.
[0035] It should also be appreciated that the present invention can be implemented in numerous ways, including as a system, a method or a device. In this specification, these implementations, or any other form that the invention may take, may be referred to as processes. In general, the order of the steps of the disclosed processes may be altered within the scope of the invention.
[0036] Various terms as used herein are shown below. To the extent a term used in a claim is not defined below, it should be given the broadest definition persons in the pertinent art have given that term as reflected in printed publications and issued patents at the time of filing.
[0037] An embodiment of the present disclosure discloses an adjuvant composition for a pesticide comprising: 95-99 % w/w of a petroleum oil of the total wt. of the composition; and 1-5 % w/w of a surfactant of the total wt. of the composition.
[0038] In an embodiment of the present disclosure discloses that the petroleum oil is selected from a group consisting of Paraffinic base oil, paraffin oil, a group II/II+ base oil, a group III base oil and combination thereof. The petroleum oil is manufactured by severe hydrotreating refining process using a metal containing zeolite, ZSM-22 with smaller crystal size, and optimal acidity, external surface area and surface area which leads to a hydroisomerization catalyst with high activity and high isomerization selectivity at less severe operating conditions. The petroleum oil has characterized by: Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) <30 ppb; Total Aromatic content <0.1%; Saturates >99.9%; UV absorption <0.1 abs; Un-Sulphonated Residue (USR) 100%; and Paraffinic Content >70%.
[0039] In an embodiment of the present disclosure discloses that the surfactant is selected form non-ionic surfactant and ionic surfactant. The non-ionic surfactant contains alkyl ethoxylates having a carbon chain length in the range of 4 to 30 and ethylene oxide units in the range of 1 to 20. The non-ionic surfactant is polyglycol ether with 5 mol of EO (ethylene oxide) based on oleyl alcohol/cetyl alcohol. The non-ionic surfactant has an HLB in the range of 8-10. The ionic surfactant has a surfactant packing ratio (P) in the range of 0.6 to about 1.2, and partition coefficient (Pow) is 6.10.
[0040] Another embodiment of the present disclosure discloses process for preparation of an adjuvant composition for a pesticide comprising: mixing of 95-99 % w/w of a petroleum oil of the total wt. of the composition with 1-5 % w/w of a surfactant of the total wt. of the composition to obtain an adjuvant composition for a pesticide.
[0041] In an embodiment of the present disclosure discloses that alkyl ethoxylates that may be used in the present invention have a carbon chain length of from 4 to 30, and from 1 to 20 ethylene oxide units. Preferably, the alkyl ethoxylate has a carbon chain length of from 10 to 20, and from 2 to 10 ethylene oxide units. More preferably alkyl ethoxylate has a carbon chain in the range of 15 to 20 and ethylene oxide units in the range of 1 to 6. More preferably, the alkyl ethoxylate has a carbon chain length of from 16 to 18, and from 5 to 6 ethylene oxide units. The selected alkyl ethoxylate molecules is soluble in low polarity liquids.
[0042] In an embodiment of the present disclosure discloses that the composition of the present disclosure discloses that the petroleum oil is selected from the group consisting of a group II/II+ base oil, a group III base oil have PAH >30 ppb, aromatic content >0.1% and saturates >99.9%.
[0043] In an embodiment of the present disclosure discloses that the stability is tested at 75 deg and also as per CIPAC method.
[0044] Source and Geographical origin of biological resource:
Biological material Geographical origin
Oligonychus coffeae,
Helopeltis theivora Borbheta Tea Estate, Jorhat, Assam
Looper Soraipani Tea Estate, Jorhat, Assam
Red Slug Diffloo Tea Estate, Bokakhat, Assam
Scale insect Lukwah Tea Estate, Sivsagar, Assam
Thrips Dalowjan Tea Estate, Golaghat, Assam
Looper Simulbari Tea Estate, Darjeeling, West Bengal
Helopeltis Tirrihana Tea Estate, Darjeeling, West Bengal
Red Spider Mite Bengdubi Tea Estate, Darjeeling, West Bengal
Thrips and greenfly Sannyasithan Tea Estate, Darjeeling, West Bengal

ADVANTAGES OF THE PRESENT INVENTION
[0045] The adjuvant composition according to the invention is characterized as organic input with high biodegradability.
[0046] Also, the advantage for an adjuvant composition according to the invention is the high efficacy and negligible toxicity, including low eye and skin irritability and low aquatic toxicity.
[0047] The present invention teaches a nonionic surfactant composition with paraffinic oil, and their use as adjuvants, for pesticides which are highly compatible with anionic components of various insecticide formulations. The present invention provides a adjuvant composition that gives enhanced wetting of spray solutions on difficult to wet surfaces, such as waxy plants, and enhance the uptake of agrichemicals into plants as compared to more commonly used blends such as of nonionic polyalkyleneoxide/trisiloxane alkoxylate surfactants due to the antagonism associated with pesticide.
[0048] The composition of the present invention is useful as a tank side additive, or as a component in a pesticide, fungicide or herbicide formulation. In addition, the compositions of the present invention are useful as adjuvants for other pesticides, such as, fungicides, insecticides, plant growth regulators, acaracides and the like.
[0049] These compositions provide the synergism associated with certain classes of insecticides and provide opportunity for reduction of overall insecticide loading.
[0050] While the foregoing describes various embodiments of the disclosure, other and further embodiments of the disclosure may be devised without departing from the basic scope thereof. The invention is not limited to the described embodiments, versions or examples, which are included to enable a person having ordinary skill in the art to make and use the invention when combined with information and knowledge available to the person having ordinary skill in the art.

EXAMPLES
[0051] The present invention is further explained in the form of following examples. However, it is to be understood that the following examples are merely illustrative and are not to be taken as limitations upon the scope of the invention.
Examples 1:
[0052] An adjuvant composition for a pesticide having 99 % w/w of paraffin oil and 1 % w/w of a polyglycol ether with 5 mol of EO (ethylene oxide) based on oleyl alcohol.
Examples 2:
[0053] An adjuvant composition for a pesticide having 95 % w/w of group II/II+ base oil and 5 % w/w of a polyglycol ether with 5 mol of EO (ethylene oxide) based on cetyl alcohol.
Example 3:
[0054] An adjuvant composition for a pesticide having 96 % w/w of group III base oil and 4 % w/w of a polyglycol ether with 5 mol of EO (ethylene oxide) based on oleyl alcohol.
Example 4:
[0055] An adjuvant composition for a pesticide having 96.5% Paraffinic base oil and 3.5% polyglycol ether with 5 mol of EO (ethylene oxide) based on oleyl alcohol.
Example 5
[0056] The adjuvant composition as mentioned in example 4 is used to study the adjuvant activity in combination with approved pesticides against major pests of tea.
[0057] Pests targeted for experiments include:
1. Red Spider Mite (Oligonychus coffeae)
5. Thrips (Scirtothrips dorsalis)
2. Tea Mosquito Bug (Helopeltis theivora) 6. Red Slug (Eterusia spp.)

3. Tea looper (Hyposidra talaca)
7. Scale insects (Fiorinia theae)
4. Greenfly (Empoasca spp.)

[0058] Recommended Pesticides used:
Acaricides
Insecticides
Contact poison Systemic poison Contact poison Systemic poison Translaminar

Fenpyroximate 5SC

Etoxazole 10 SC
Deltamethrin 2.8EC

Quinalphos 25 EC
Thiamethoxam 25 WG
Emamectin benzoate 5% SG

[0059] To study the adjuvant activity of adjuvant composition as mentioned in example 4 in combination with approved pesticides against major pests of tea, laboratory experiments of insecticide alone and in combination with adjuvant composition as mentioned in example 4 (0.5%) were conducted using the leaf dip method against targeted pests. Field experiments were conducted in two locations (Assam and West Bengal region) following Randomized Block Design (RBD). Observations in both laboratory and field experiments showed that pesticides used in combination with adjuvant composition as mentioned in example 4 are found to be more effective than pesticides used alone.
[0060] Experimental results of adjuvant activity of adjuvant composition as mentioned in example 4 in combination with approved pesticides against major pests of tea are given below:

Table 1: Laboratory trial result for Looper (Hyposidra talaca):

Treatment Dose Percentage Mortality in 24 hours Percentage Mortality in 48 hours
T1
(Quinalphos) 1:400 36.67±3.34 53.33±3.34
T2
(Quinalphos +Example 4) 1:400 +0.5% 70±5.77 100±0.00
T3
(Deltamethrin) 1:2000 26.67±3.34 36.67±3.34
T4 (Deltamethrin+ Example 4) 1:2000+0.5% 50±0.00 90±0.00
T5
(Emamectin) 1:2500 66.67±6.67 96.67±3.34
T6
(Emamectin+ Example 4) 1:2500+0.5% 86.67±6.67 100±0.00
CV% 13.25971
3.633673

CD(P<0.05) 16.16 6.10
Df(Degree of freedom) 5 5
F- value 17.67532 184.81
P – value at 5% significane level 0.000111 .000
F-crit 3.325835 3.325835

Table 2: Laboratory trial for Helopeltis theivora

Treatment Dose % Mortality in 24 hours % Mortality in 48 hours
T1(Quinalphos) 100 ppm 33.34±6.67 80±5.77
T2(Quinalphos+ Example 4) 100 ppm+0.5% 73.34±3.34 100±0.00
T3(Deltamethrin) 100 ppm 60.00±0.00 76.67±3.34
T4(Deltamethrin+ Example 4) 100 ppm +0.5% 90±0.00 100±0.00
T5(Thiamethoxam) 1:4000 63.34±3.34 100±0.00
T6(Thiamethoxam+ Example 4) 1:4000+0.5% 83.34±3.34 100±0
CV% 7.15 5.08
CD (p<0.05) 10.89 9.57
Df (Degree of freedom) 5 5
F-value 31.34286
42.66667

p- value at 5% level of significance 0.000 0.000
F-crit 3.325835
3.325835

Table 3: Laboratory trail for Green fly (Empoasca flavescens)

Treatment Dose % Mortality in 24 hours % Mortality in 48 hours
T1(Quinalphos) 1:400 66.67±3.34 80±5.77
T2(Quinalphos+ Example 4) 1:400+0.5% 100±0.00 100±0.00
T3(Deltamethrin) 1:2000 56.67±3.34 76.67±3.34
T4(Deltamethrin+ Example 4) 1:2000+0.5% 90±3.34 100±0.00
T5(Thiamethoxam) 1:4000 26.67±3.34 50±5.77
T6(Thiamethoxam+ Example 4) 1:4000+0.5% 86.67±3.34 100-±0.00
CV% 5.41 5.08
CD (p<0.05) 8.83 9.57
Df (Degree of freedom) 5 5
F-value 81.73913
42.66667

p- value at 5% level of significance .000 .000
F-crit

Table 4: Laboratory trial for Scritothrips dorsalis (Thrips):

Treatment Dose % Mortality in 24 hours % Mortality in 48 hours
T1
(Quinalphos) 1:400 30±0.00 76.67±6.67
T2
(Quinalphos+ Example 4) 1:400+0.5% 93.34±3.34 100±0.00
T3
(Deltamethrin) 1:2000 23.34±6.67 63.34±6.67
T4
(Deltamethrin+ Example 4) 1:2000+0.5% 56.67±3.34 80±5.78
T5(Thiamethoxam) 1:4000 10±0.00 80±0.00
T6
(Thiamethoxam+ Example 4) 1:4000+0.5% 50±5.78 90±0.00
CV% 12.56 6.75
CD (p<0.05) 11.35 12.35
Df (Degree of freedom) 5 5
F-value 62.65789
9.266667

p- value at 5% level of significance .000 0.001627

F-crit 3.325835
3.325835

Table 5: Laboratory trial for Red spider mites (Oligonychus coffeae):

Treatment Dose(PPM) % Mortality in 24 hours % Mortality in 48 hours
T1
(Etoxazole) 600 30±5.77 56.67±6.67
T3
(Etoxazole+ Example 4) 600+50 100±0.00 100±0.00
T4
(Fenpyroximate) 300 56.67±6.67 80±5.67
T5 (Fenpyroximate+ Example 4) 300+50 73.34±8.81 100±0.00
CV% 14.16 6.4
CD(P<0.05) 21.20 15.13
Df (Degree of freedom) 3 3
F-value 17.58491
17

p- value at 5% level of significance 0.002238
0.002448

F-crit 4.757063
4.757063

Table 6: Laboratory trial for Red Slug caterpillar (Eterusia aedea):

Treatment Dose % Mortality in 24 hours % Mortality in 48 hours
T1
(Quinalphos) 1:400 66.67±3.34
76.67±6.67
T2
(Quinalphos+ Example 4) 1:400+0.5% 93.34±3.34 100±0.00
T3
(Deltamethrin) 1:2000 0±0.00 0±0.00
T4
(Deltamethrin+ Example 4) 1:2000+0.5% 36.67±3.34
53.34±3.34
T5(Emamectin) 1:4000 0±0.00 50±0.00
T6
(Emamectin + Example 4) 1:4000+0.5% 23.34±3.34 63.34±3.34
CV% 10.49727762 4.902030587
CD (p<0.05) 9.023596
7.594013237
P value at 5% significance level 0.000 0.000
F value 157 192.4705882
F crit 3.325834529 3.325834529

Table 7: Field trial of adjuvant composition (Example 4) in combination with insecticide against Looper (H.talaca)

Treatment Dose Mean Population reduction in 3days (%) Mean Population reduction in 5days (%)
Quinalphos 1:400 59.49±1.02 87.56±0.86
Quinalphos + Example 4 1:400+0.5% 70.47±0.78 94.92±0.97
Deltamethrin 1:2000 55.20±2.25 81.44±1.28
Deltamethrin+ Example 4 1:2000+0.5% 71.45±1.50 95±0.64
Emamectin 1:2500 81.93±1.38 90.56±0.73
Emamectin + Example 4 1:2500+0.5% 96.51±o.82 97.63±0.79
CV % 3.10 1.66
CD (p<0.05) 2.58 1.53
Df value 5 5
P-value at 5% significance level 0.000 0.000
F value 104.0364
51.5348

F-crit 3.325835
3.325835

Table 8: Field trial of adjuvant composition (Example 4) in combination with insecticide against Looper (H.talaca)

Treatment Dose Mean Population reduction in 3days (%) Mean Population reduction in 5days (%)
Quinalphos 1:400 77.99±0.62 83.34±1.14
Quinalphos + Example 4 1:400+0.5% 83.37±1.50 90.16±0.83
Deltamethrin 1:2000 68.85±0.77 88.36±2.01
Deltamethrin+ Example 4 1:2000+0.5% 86.40±1.38 90.04±3.45
Emamectin 1:2500 75.78±2.25 90.56±1.96
Emamectin + Example 4 1:2500+0.5% 88.77±0.89 95.53±1.20
CV% 3.16 3.40
CD(p<0.05) 4.06 5.92
Df value 5 5
P-value at 5% significance level 0.000 0.023831
F value 40.63982 4.3033423
F-crit 3.325835 3.325835

Table 9: Field trial of adjuvant composition (Example 4) in combination with insecticide against H.theivora

Treatment Dose Mean Population reduction in 7days (%)
Quinalphos 1:400 40.24±4.54
Quinalphos + Example 4 1:400+0.5% 56.72±2.54
Deltamethrin 1:2000 37.64±0.85
Deltamethrin+ Example 4 1:2000+0.5% 55.57±2.39
Thiamethoxam 1:2500 56.14±2.77
Thiamethoxam + Example 4 1:2500+0.5% 89.68±2.40
CV% 8.00
CD(p<0.05) 8.99
Df value 5
P-value at 5% significance level .000
F value 38.9471
F-crit 3.325835

Table 10: Field trial of adjuvant composition (Example 4) in combination with insecticide against H.theivora

Treatment Dose Mean Population reduction in 7days (%)
Quinalphos 1:400 69.28±1.42
Quinalphos + Example 4 1:400+0.5% 81.87±1.76
Deltamethrin 1:2000 59.94±3.40
Deltamethrin+ Example 4 1:2000+0.5% 75.16±4.67
Thiamethoxam 1:2500 63.89±0.48
Thiamethoxam + Example 4 1:2500+0.5% 73.19±2.57
CV% 5.82
CD(p<0.05) 6.68
Df value 5
P-value at 5% significance level 0.000426
F value 12.91044
F-crit 3.325835

Table 11: Field trial of adjuvant composition (Example 4) in combination with insecticide against Thrips

Treatment Dose Population reduction in 7days (%) Population reduction in 14 days (%)
Quinalphos 1:400 70.62±1.28 77.30±0.59
Quinalphos + Example 4 1:400+0.5% 74.98±0.75 88.65±0.99
Deltamethrin 1:2000 51.96±2.65 62.01±1.44
Deltamethrin+ Example 4 1:2000+0.5% 67.57±1.21 77.66±1.48
Thiamethoxam 1:4000 53.03±2.13 64.10±1.72
Thiamrthoxam + Example 4 1:4000+0.5% 66.36±1.95 84.21±0.03
CV% 4.27 2.29
CD(p<0.05) 6.05 3.69
Df value 5 5
P-value at 5% significance level 0.012862 0.000
F value 5.226935 26.48724
F-crit 3.325835 3.325835

Table 12: Field trial of adjuvant composition (Example 4) in combination with insecticide against Thrips

Treatment Dose Population reduction in 3days (%) Population reduction in 7days (%)
Quinalphos 1:400 55.49±1.77 64.60±1.56
Quinalphos + Example 4 1:400+0.5% 70.20± 0.90 80.99±0.50
Deltamethrin 1:2000 47.88±1.56 56.14±4.16
Deltamethrin+ Example 4 1:2000+0.5% 66±1.13 71.32±2.28
Thiamethoxam 1:4000 49.81±3.79 62.09±2.87
Thiamrthoxam + Example 4 1:4000+0.5% 63.95±3.53 85.63±0.48
CV% 6.23 3.43
CD(p<0.05) 4.38 7.14
Df value 5 5
P-value at 5% significance level 0.000372 0.000
F value 13.34039 23.11706
F-crit 3.325835 3.325835

Table 13: Field trial of adjuvant composition (Example 4) in combination with insecticide against RSM (Oligonychus coffeae)

Treatment Dose Mean Population reduction in 3days (%) Mean Population reduction in 7days (%)
T1
Mitigate 1:1500 57.80±5.69 78.29±2.08
T2
Mitigate+ Example 4 1:1500+0.5% 75.87±6.88 89.62±2.17
T3
Etoxazole 1:1600 37.44±5.86 57.82±1.60
T4
Etoxazole + Example 4 1:1600+0.5% 89.06±1.91 93.93±1.43
CV% 13.55 3.95
CD 15.70 5.72
Df value 3 3
P-value at 5% significance level 0.001908 0.000
F value 18.6694 72.70368
F-crit 4.757063 4.757063

Table 14: Field trial of adjuvant composition (Example 4) in combination with insecticide against RSM (Oligonychus coffeae)

Treatment Dose Mean Population reduction in 3days (%)
Mitigate 1:1500 55.48±1.41
Mitigate+ Example 4 1:1500+0.5% 91.90±1.24
Etoxazole 1:1600 68.96±0.32
Etoxazole + Example 4 1:1600+0.5% 93.19±1.23
Control 0.75±2.05
CV% 7.44
CD(P<0.05) 6.54
Df value 3
P-value at 5% significance level 0.000377
F value 33.68092
F-crit 4.757063

Table 15: Field trial of adjuvant composition (Example 4) in combination with insecticide against Greenfly

Treatment Dose Mean Population reduction in 3days (%) Mean Population reduction in 7days (%)
Quinalphos 1:400 69.78±2.15 78.61± 1.34
Quinalphos + Example 4 1:400+0.5% 78.23±0.91 87.83±1.64
Deltamethrin 1:2000 68.42±3.67 79.14±2.57
Deltamethrin+ Example 4 1:2000+0.5% 81.17±2.82 86.69±0.68
Thiamethoxam 1:4000 69.08±1.22 79.37±3.66
Thiamethoxam + Example 4 1:4000+0.5% 91.13± 1.68 93.72±1.70
Control 2.70±3.00 1.53±0.12
CV% 4.71 3.98
CD 7.12 6.26
Df value 5 5
P-value at 5% significance level 0.000493 0.001939
F value 12.46548 8.856353
F-crit 3.325835 3.325835

Table 16: Field trial against Scale insects

Treatment Dose Population reduction in 7days (%) Population reduction in 14 days (%)
Quinalphos 1:400 8.63±3.42 48.16±3.48
Quinalphos + Example 4 1:400+0.5% 34.62±3.14 71±0.99
Deltamethrin 1:2000 5.38±0.83 25.21±8.75
Deltamethrin+ Example 4 1:2000+0.5% 45.42±3.81 55.29±5.63
Thiamethoxam 1:4000 27.74±6.34 49.09±7.34
Thiamethoxam + Example 4 1:4000+0.5% 48.58±6.87 64.38±3.35
CV% 24.84 16.93
CD(p<0.05) 16.93 15.95
P value 0.033 0.044
F value 7.84 6.86
F crit 6.39 6.39

[0061] A composition according to claim has synergistic effect (when chemical substances or biological structures interact resulting in an overall effect that is greater than the sum of individual effects of any of them. Synergistic effects are the combined effects of at least two substances making an impact that is more significant than both of them could have shown by themselves) with Fenpyroximate 5SC, Etoxazole 10 SC, Deltamethrin 2.8EC, Quinalphos 25 EC, Thiamethoxam 25 WG, Emamectin benzoate 5% SG against the target pest.
Example 6: Organoleptic evaluation of made tea for taint effect of pesticide combination with adjuvant composition of Example 4.
[0062] For organoleptic evaluation of made tea for taint effect of pesticide combination with adjuvant composition of Example 4 on black tea, field experiments were conducted using three different concentrations [0.5% (T1), 1% (T2) and 2% (T3)] of adjuvant composition of Example 4 along with untreated control (T5). 7 days and 14 days post treatment plucked shoots were processed in mini CTC machines and samples were sent to tea taster in Lab. Results indicate neither taint nor residual effect on made tea.

Report of taint effect is given below:

Example 7: To study the phytotoxic effect of adjuvant composition of Example 4 alone and in combination with recommended pesticides.
[0063] Results showed no phytotoxicity of adjuvant composition of Example 4 in combination with pesticides up to 63 days of observation.
[0064] The phytotoxic effect of applying the test substance was scored in the field trials of red spider mite and tea mosquito bug at weekly interval after spraying and continued for 63 days. Based on the kind of change in the appearance of the tea leaves scores were pooled. If the leaf tips bore injury marks or leaf surfaces showed injury marks or if the leaf showed symptoms of wilting a score of 20% was assigned to each of them. 10% of phytotoxicity was scored for symptoms of tissue necrosis, epinasty or hyponasty. Weekly observations of the phytotoxic symptoms in each plot and their corresponding scores were pooled and compared with the untreated control.

No phytotoxic effect was observed up to 63 days.
Pooled level of phytotoxicity (%) Grade
0-10 1
11-20 2
21-30 3
31-40 4
41-50 5
51-60 6
61-70 7
71-80 8
81-90 9
Table showing grades against different percentage intervals of phytotoxicity
[0065] No residue in the made tea observed.
For residue evaluation of made tea for residue analysis of pesticide combination with adjuvant composition of Example 4 on black tea, field experiments were conducted using three different concentrations [0.5% (T1), 1% (T2) and 2% (T3)] of adjuvant composition of Example 4 along with untreated control (T5). 7 days and 14 days post treatment plucked shoots were processed in mini-CTC machines and samples were sent to for residual testing. No residual for the adjuvant composition of Example 4 was deducted in the test report.
[0066] A skilled artisan will appreciate that the quantity and type of each ingredient can be used in different combinations or singly. All such variations and combinations would be falling within the scope of present disclosure.
[0067] The foregoing examples are merely illustrative and are not to be taken as limitations upon the scope of the invention. Various changes and modifications to the disclosed embodiments will be apparent to those skilled in the art. Such changes and modifications may be made without departing from the scope of the invention.

, Claims:1. An adjuvant composition for a pesticide comprising:
95-99 % w/w of a petroleum oil of the total wt. of the composition; and
1-5 % w/w of a surfactant of the total wt. of the composition.
2. The composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the petroleum oil is selected from a group consisting of Paraffinic base oil, paraffin oil, a group II/II+ base oil, a group III base oil and combination thereof.
3. The composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the surfactant is selected form non-ionic surfactant and ionic surfactant.
4. The composition as claimed in claim 3, wherein the non-ionic surfactant contains alkyl ethoxylates having a carbon chain length in the range of 4 to 30 and ethylene oxide units in the range of 1 to 20.
5. The composition as claimed in claim 3, wherein the non-ionic surfactant is polyglycol ether with 5 mol of EO (ethylene oxide) based on oleyl alcohol/cetyl alcohol.
6. The composition as claimed in claims 4 and 5, wherein the non-ionic surfactant has an HLB in the range of 8-10.
7. The composition as claimed in claim 2, wherein the petroleum oil is manufactured by severe hydrotreating refining process using a metal containing zeolite, ZSM-22 with smaller crystal size, and optimal acidity, external surface area and surface area which leads to a hydroisomerization catalyst with high activity and high isomerization selectivity at less severe operating conditions.
8. The composition as claimed in claim 8, wherein the petroleum oil has characterized by:
Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) <30 ppb;
Total Aromatic content <0.1%;
Saturates >99.9%;
UV absorption <0.1 abs;
Un-Sulphonated Residue (USR) 100%; and
Paraffinic Content >70%.
9. A process for preparation of an adjuvant composition for a pesticide comprising:
mixing of 95-99 % w/w of a petroleum oil of the total wt. of the composition with 1-5 % w/w of a surfactant of the total wt. of the composition to obtain an adjuvant composition for a pesticide.