DESC:FIELD
The present disclosure relates to a pesticidal composition and a process for its preparation.
DEFINITIONS
As used in the present disclosure, the following terms are generally intended to have the meaning as set forth below, except to the extent that the context in which they are used indicate otherwise.
Pesticide: Pesticides are substances that are meant to control pests or weeds. The term pesticide includes all of the following: herbicide, insecticide, insect growth regulator, nematicide, termiticide, molluscicide, piscicide, avicide, rodenticide, bactericide, insect repellent, animal repellent, antimicrobial, fungicide, disinfectant (antimicrobial), and sanitizer.
Nereistoxin: The term “nereistoxin” refers to a naturally occurring toxin capable of blocking both muscle and neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptors.
Translaminar: The term “translaminar” refers to compounds (usually a pesticide) that can enter leaves to form a reservoir of toxic ingredients. It affects pests that feed on the treated as well as the untreated side of the leaves.
BACKGROUND
The background information herein below relates to the present disclosure but is not necessarily prior art.
In order to satisfy the food requirements of the growing population, it is important to maximize food production. One way of increasing the food production is to protect crops from harmful pests that reduce food production. Conventionally, chemicals such as organochlorines, organophosphates, organosulfurs, carbamates, formamidines, dinitrophenols, organotins, pyrethroid, pyrazoles, phenylpyrazoles, and pyrroles are used to control/manage pests.
Cartap hydrochloride is an insecticide belonging to the thiocarbamate class of insecticides. Cartap hydrochloride is a systemic insecticide having stomach and contact action, and is used for controlling chewing and sucking pests, which results in insect paralysis, and hence insects are not able to feed, and die of starvation. Cartap hydrochloride is typically used, at a concentration in the range of 0.4-1.0 kg/ha, for control of chewing and sucking insects (particularly Lepidoptera and Coleoptera), at almost all stages of development, on many crops, including rice (Chilo suppressalis, Cnaphalocrocis medinalis, Lissorhoptrus oryzophilus and rice-leaf beetle), potatoes, cabbage and other vegetables (Agromyzidae, Leptinotarsa decemlineata and Plutella xylostella); also on soya beans, peanuts, sunflowers, maize, sugar beet, wheat, pearl barley, pome fruit, stone fruit, citrus fruit, vines, chestnuts, ginger, tea, cotton, and sugar cane.
The structure of cartap hydrochloride is given herein below as Formula-1.


Formula-1
Tricyclazole is a fungicide belonging to the triazole class of fungicides. Tricyclazole is a systemic fungicide for protecting paddy crops. Tricyclazole is applied in the form of a flat drench, transplant root soak, and foliar application. Conventionally, one or two applications by the aforestated methods provide a season long control of the disease. The IUPAC name of tricyclazole is 5-Methyl-1,2,4-triazolo [3,4-b] [1,3] benzothiazole. The structure of tricyclazole is given herein below as Formula-2.

Formula-2
Conazoles also referred to as triazoles, are heterocyclic compounds having a molecular formula C2H3N3. These are demethylation inhibitors (DMI), which contain the triazole fungicides. Triazoles can be used on many different types of plants including field crops, fruit trees, small fruit, vegetables, and turf. These triazole/ conazole fungicides are highly effective against many different fungal diseases, such as powdery mildews, rusts, and many leaf-spotting fungi. The triazole fungicides inhibit one specific enzyme, i.e., C14-demethylase, which is important in sterol production. Sterols, such as ergosterol, are needed for membrane structure and function, making them essential for the development of functional cell walls. Therefore, these fungicides result in abnormal fungal growth and eventually death.
The mode of action for cartap, conazole and tricyclazole are totally different, as they are unique in their targeted pest(s). However, these pesticides are applied individually at different times, during the growth of the plant crop, and are therefore labour intensive and time consuming.
Therefore, there is felt a need for a synergistic pesticidal composition having enhanced efficacy and ready to use form in a single application. There also exists the need for pesticidal compositions that combine knock-down activity with prolonged control, i.e., with long lasting action and help prevent/overcome resistance.
OBJECTS
Some of the objects of the present disclosure, which at least one embodiment herein satisfies, are as follows:
It is an object of the present disclosure is to ameliorate one or more problems of the prior art or to at least provide a useful alternative.
Another object of the present disclosure is to provide a synergistic pesticidal composition which solves the problems of reducing the dosage rate.
Still another object of the present disclosure is to provide a stable and ready to use pesticidal composition.
Yet another object of the present disclosure is to provide a pesticidal composition having enhanced efficacy or enhancing the spectrum of activity.
It is therefore an object of the present disclosure to provide a pesticidal composition which exhibits enhanced action against pests compared to the control rates that are possible with the individual compounds and/or is suitable for improving the health of plants when applied to plants, parts of plants, plant propagation materials, or at their locus of growth.
Other objects and advantages of the present disclosure will be more apparent from the following description, which is not intended to limit the scope of the present disclosure.
SUMMARY
The present disclosure provides a pesticidal composition and a process for its preparation. The present disclosure provides a pesticidal composition comprising cartap hydrochloride, at least one conazole and a tricyclazole.
The pesticidal composition comprises a synergistic combination of cartap hydrochloride in an amount in the range of 0.1 wt% to 50 wt% of the composition, at least one conazole in an amount in the range of 0.1 wt% to 40 wt % of the composition, and tricyclazole in an amount in the range of 0.1 wt% to 40 wt% of the composition. The pesticidal composition further comprises agrochemically acceptable additives selected from the group consisting of at least one surfactant, at least one stabilizer, at least one filler, at least one coloring agent, at least one acidifying agent, and at least one carrier.
The synergistic action of cartap hydrochloride, conazole, and tricyclazole, along with the specific combination of the ingredients used in the present disclosure provides improved bio-efficacy. The pesticidal composition of the present disclosure may be used to prevent/treat multiple pests through a single application.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
Embodiments are provided so as to thoroughly and fully convey the scope of the present disclosure to the person skilled in the art. Numerous details, are set forth, relating to specific components, and methods, to provide a complete understanding of embodiments of the present disclosure. It will be apparent to the person skilled in the art that the details provided in the embodiments should not be construed to limit the scope of the present disclosure. In some embodiments, well-known processes, and well-known techniques are not described in detail.
The terminology used, in the present disclosure, is only for the purpose of explaining a particular embodiment and such terminology shall not be considered to limit the scope of the present disclosure. As used in the present disclosure, the forms "a,” "an," and "the" may be intended to include the plural forms as well, unless the context clearly suggests otherwise. The terms "comprises," "comprising," “including,” and “having,” are open ended transitional phrases and therefore specify the presence of stated features, integers, steps, operations, elements, modules, units and/or components, but do not forbid the presence or addition of one or more other features, integers, steps, operations, elements, components, and/or groups thereof. The particular order of steps disclosed in the method and process of the present disclosure is not to be construed as necessarily requiring their performance as described or illustrated. It is also to be understood that additional or alternative steps may be employed.
It is desirable to provide farmers with a ready to use formulation of two or more active ingredients which can simply be put into a tank and then sprayed or broadcasted directly. However, all the combinations may not be compatible or stable over long periods and therefore it is necessary in many cases to mix the active ingredients prior to application. The present disclosure envisages a stable and ready to use synergistic pesticidal composition having enhanced efficacy.
In an aspect of the present disclosure, there is provided a synergistic pesticidal composition comprising cartap hydrochloride, at least one conazole, and tricyclazole.
Cartap-HCl is an insecticide of Nereistoxin analogue group, which provides effective control of insect pests through its contact, systemic and stomach poison action and has a remarkable capacity to control caterpillars. It is safe for environment, is suitable for Integrated Pest Management (IPM) system, and is a persistent insecticide that controls the pests for a longer period. Farmers generally apply the granules of cartap hydrochloride, 15-25 days after the plantation, to prevent stem borer infestations, and leaf roller at later stages.
In accordance with the embodiments of the present disclosure, the amount of cartap hydrochloride can be in the range of 0.1 wt% to 50 wt% of the composition.
Typically, the conazole can be selected from the group consisting of hexaconazole, azaconazole, bromuconazole, cyproconazole, diclobutrazol, difenoconazole, diniconazole, diniconazole-M, epoxiconazole, etaconazole, fenbuconazole, fluquinconazole, flusilazole, flutriafol, furconazole, imibenconazole, ipconazole, metconazole, myclobutanil, penconazole, propiconazole, prothioconazole, quinconazole, simeconazole, tebuconazole, tetraconazole, triadimefon, triadimenol, triticonazole, and uniconazole.
In accordance with the embodiments of the present disclosure, the conazole can be selected from the group consisting of hexaconazole, cyproconazole, difenoconazole, epoxiconazole, ipconazole, metconazole, myclobutanil, penconazole, propiconazole, prothioconazole, tebuconazole, and tetraconazole.
In an embodiment of the present disclosure, the conazole can be selected from hexaconazole, prothioconazole and difenconazole.
In an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure, the conazole is hexaconazole.
Conazoles are highly effective systemic fungicide with protective and eradicative action, against a wide range of plant diseases such as Erysiphales (Powdery mildew) Ascomycetes (Scab) Basidiomycetes (Rust), and Fungi imperfecti (Wilt). Conazoles have a translaminar action, and are quickly absorbed, and translocated within the leaf, and the plant system, resulting in rapid, and effective disease control. Conazoles are capable of protective, curative and eradicative (prevents spore formation) chemical. Conazoles provide phytotonic effect, and improves the plants’ visible characteristics, i.e., yield and quality of the produce. Conazoles have long lasting effect, are environment friendly, and have no residue problem on the crops. Farmers generally apply conazoles during active tillering stage, typically, 25-45 days after planting, to control sheath blight (Rhizoctonia oryzae), which is a prevalent disease across paddy growing areas. It is also effective against diseases such as brown spot (Helminthosporium oryzae) and narrow brown leaf spot (Cercospora oryzae).
In accordance with the embodiments of the present disclosure, the amount of conazole can be in the range of 0.1 wt% to 40 wt% of the composition.
The pesticidal composition of the present disclosure also comprises tricyclazole. Tricyclazole belongs to the group of melanin biosynthesis inhibitors. It inhibits the melanin formation in fungi. Tricyclazole inhibits sporulation and secondary infection. It is a systemic fungicide that gets rapidly absorbed and translocated all over the plants. Tricyclazole is a systemic fungicide that effectively controls paddy blast disease; Tricyclazole is generally applied by farmers around 25 days after planting to 25 days before harvest to control blast (Pyricularia oryzae), as this disease can appear during any stage of the paddy.
In accordance with the embodiments of the present disclosure, the amount of Tricyclazole can be in the range of 0.1 wt% to 40 wt% of the composition.
Farmers usually apply different insecticide/ fungicide such as cartap, conazole, and tricyclazole to the plants based on the time of applications. The targets are totally different for each chemical as they are unique in their targeted pest(s). However, these pesticides are applied individually at different times, during the growth of the plant crop, and are therefore labour intensive and time consuming. The synergistic pesticidal composition of the present disclosure has enhanced efficacy, is available in a ready to use form in a single application. The labour consumption for the application of the synergistic pesticidal composition of the present disclosure is comparatively lower and hence, is cost effective. Further, the synergistic and the compatible pesticidal composition of the present disclosure is more effective than the tank mix/sand mix and avoids repeated spraying of different pesticides and further reduces cost, which will help the farming community. So the mixture of cartap, tricyclazole and conazole chemicals adds great value to the farmer for improved yields by preventing the pest/s in time and adds further value by reducing the cost of labour, which is a herculean task, to repeat the sprays with a target to control different pest/s at different times of crop stage.
The composition of the present disclosure is economical and feasible to apply in the situation where co-existing of pest takes place. The pesticidal composition of the present disclosure is more suitable for application to address multiple pest and diseases at a time and available ready to use form.
The pesticidal composition of the present disclosure further comprises one or more agrochemically acceptable additives. Typically, the additives can be selected from the group consisting of at least one surfactant, at least one stabilizer, at least one filler, at least one coloring agent, at least one carrier, at least one acidifying agent, and combinations thereof.
In accordance with the embodiments of the present disclosure, the typical amounts of the additives are:
- surfactant in the range of 0.5 wt% to 10 wt% of the composition,
- stabilizer in the range of 0.1 wt% to 10 wt% of the composition,
- filler in the range of 0.1 wt% to 100 wt% of the composition,
- coloring agent in the range of 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% of the composition,
- acidifying agent in the range of 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% of the composition, and
- carrier in the range of 1 wt% to 90 wt% of the composition.
The surfactant can be selected from the group consisting of non-ionic surfactants, wetting agent, dispersing agent such as ethoxylated aliphatic alcohol, polyglycerol alkyl ethers, glycol ethers, crownethers, ester-linked surfactants, polyoxyethylene alkyl ethers, Brij, Spans (sorbitan esters) Tweens (Polysorbates), Sodium lignosulphonte, sodium lauryl sulphate, ammonium lauryl sulfate alkyl naphthalene sulphonate, dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate and alkyl naphthalene sulphonate condensate.
The stabilizer can be selected from acids and phosphates.
The filler can be selected from clay, silica, sodium sulphates.
The coloring agent is selected from anthraquinone class of coloring agents.
The acidifying agent can be selected from weak acids such as phosphoric acid, oxalic acid and acetic acid.
In an embodiment of the present disclosure, the pesticidal composition comprises cartap hydrochloride in an amount in the range of 0.1 wt% to 40 wt% of the composition, at least one conazole in an amount in the range of 0.1 wt% to 30 wt% of the composition, tricyclazole in an amount in the range of 0.1 wt% to 30 wt% of the composition, and one or more agrochemically acceptable additives.
In another embodiment of the present disclosure, the pesticidal composition comprises cartap hydrochloride in an amount in the range of 0.1 wt% to 30 wt% of the composition, at least one conazole in an amount in the range of 0.1 wt% to 15 wt% of the composition, tricyclazole in an amount in the range of 0.1 wt% to 15 wt% of the composition, and agrochemically acceptable additives selected from the group consisting of at least one surfactant, at least one stabilizer, at least one filler, at least one coloring agent, at least one acidifying agent, carrier and combinations thereof.
The present disclosure in another aspect provides a process for preparing a synergistic pesticidal composition.
The pesticidal composition of the present disclosure can be in a dosage form selected from the group consisting of encapsulated granules, water dispersible granules and wettable powder.
In an embodiment of the present disclosure, the pesticidal composition is in the form of encapsulated granules.
The process for preparing the pesticidal composition in the form of encapsulated granules is described hereinafter in detail.
Pre-determined quantities of at least one surfactant, at least one stabilizer, at least one acidifying agent, and at least one coloring agent are blended in a drum fitted with a heating coil to obtain a blended mixture (Mixture A). In accordance with the embodiments of the present disclosure, the heating coil can be maintained at a temperature in the range of 60°C to 65°C.
Pre-determined quantity of a carrier is charged into a rotating blender. The so obtained blended mixture (Mixture A) obtained is heated to a temperature and then sprayed over the carrier in the rotating blender to obtain an admixture (Mixture B). In accordance with the embodiments of the present disclosure, the heating can be carried out at a temperature in the range of 55 °C to 65 °C.
The so obtained admixture (Mixture B) is then cooled to room temperature, typically at a temperature in the range of 10 °C to 40°C, and further pre-determined quantity of carrier is charged into the rotating blender to obtain a blended admixture (Mixture C). The blended admixture is typically blended for a time period in the range of 20 minutes to 60 minutes.
Pre-determined quantities of cartap, at least one conazole and tricyclazole are charged into a ribbon blender, mixed and ground in a mill to obtain wettable powder (Mixture D). Typically, the particle size of the wettable powder can be in the range of 2 micron to 8 micron.
The wettable powder (Mixture D) is then blended/mixed with the blended admixture (Mixture C) for a time period in the range of 40 minutes to 120 minutes to obtain coated granules.
The coated granules are then blended with a pre-determined quantity of a filler for a time period in the range of 20 minutes to 60 minutes to obtain the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure in the form of encapsulated granules.
In another embodiment of the present disclosure, the pesticidal composition is in the form of wettable powder.
The process for preparing the pesticidal composition in the form of wettable powder is described hereinafter in detail.
Pre-determined amounts of a filler and surfactants, are blended to obtain a mixture (Mixture A). Typically, the blending is carried out in a ribbon blender for a time period in the range of 90 minutes to 150 minutes.
Pre-determined amounts of cartap hydrochloride, at least one conazole and tricyclazole are mixed with the mixture to obtain a resultant mixture (Mixture B). The mixing is typically carried out for a time period in the range of 2 hours to 5 hours.
Pre-determined amounts of an acidifying agent (phosphoric acid), a surfactant and a stabilizer are blended to the resultant mixture to obtain a blended mixture. The blending is typically carried out for a time period in the range of 40 minutes to 120 minutes.
The blended mixture is then milled for a time period in the range of 40 minutes to 120 minutes to obtain a milled mixture. Typically, the milling is carried out in a jet mill. Milling is carried out to reduce the particle size to be in the range of 2 micron to 10 micron.
A pre-determined amount of a dispersing agent is blended to the milled mixture to obtain the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure in the form of wettable powder.
The present disclosure further provides a kit configurable as a pesticidal composition. The kit comprises cartap hydrochloride, at least one conazole, tricyclazole and agrochemically acceptable additives, and is adapted to be stored, transported, and discharged for treatment of plants, its habitat, soil, a crop or a crop field.
The pesticidal composition of the present disclosure comprising cartap hydrochloride, at least one conazole and tricyclazole can be used for treatment of plants, its habitat, soil, a crop or a crop field.
The present disclosure also provided a method for controlling pests. The method comprises contacting an infested site with a pesticidal composition comprising cartap hydrochloride, at least one conazole and tricyclazole by applying an effective amount of the composition thereon.
The pesticidal composition of the present disclosure exerts a synergistic action due to the combined effect of cartap hydrochloride, at least one conazole and tricyclazole, and thereby results in enhanced bio-efficacy. Further, as the different pesticides having different modes of action are present as a ready-to-use single kit, it is easy to apply and an enhanced bio-efficacy can be achieved by reduced number of applications.
The foregoing description of the embodiments has been provided for purposes of illustration and not intended to limit the scope of the present disclosure. Individual components of a particular embodiment are generally not limited to that particular embodiment, but, are interchangeable. Such variations are not to be regarded as a departure from the present disclosure, and all such modifications are considered to be within the scope of the present disclosure.
The present disclosure is further described in light of the following experiments which are set forth for illustration purpose only and not to be construed for limiting the scope of the disclosure. The following experiments can be scaled up to industrial/commercial scale and the results obtained can be extrapolated to industrial scale.
Experimental Detail
Experiment-1: Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.4% + Tricyclazole 1.2% GR
4 g of phosphoric acid 10.35 gm of propol PAP, 5.10 g of Propal PAD and 6 g of Acid green 25 were charged in a metal drum fitted with heating coil; and was blended for 30 minutes at a temperature of 60 °C to obtain Mixture A. 670 g of river sand was charged into a rotating blender. Mixture A was further heated to 65 °C and then sprayed over river sand in the rotating blender to obtain Mixture B. Mixture B was then cooled to 30 °C and then 204.70 g of river sand was charged into the rotating blender and mixed for 30 minutes to obtain Mixture C. 42.30 g of Cartap hydrochloride, 4.40 g of Hexaconazole technical, and 13.15 g of Tricyclazole technical were charged into a ribbon blender and was ground in a mill to obtain Mixture D, i.e., wettable powder having particle size in the range of 2 to 15 micron. Mixture D was then charged in to Mixture C in a rotating blender for 60 minutes to obtain coated granules. 40 g of Clay was blended with the coated granules for 30 minutes to obtain the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure in the form of encapsulated granules.
Experiment-2: Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.8% + Tricyclazole 2.5% GR
4 g of phosphoric acid 10.35 g of propol PAP, 5.10 g of Propol PAD and 6 g of Acid green 25 were charged in a metal drum fitted with heating coil and was blended for 30 minutes at a temperature of 60 °C to obtain Mixture A. 670 g of river sand was charged into the rotating blender. Mixture A was further heated to 65 °C and then sprayed over river sand in the rotating blender to obtain Mixture B. Mixture B was then cooled to 30 °C and further 205.1 g of river sand was charged into the rotating blender and mixed for 30 minutes to obtain Mixture C. 42.30 g of Cartap hydrochloride, 8.8 g of Hexaconazole technical, and 26.35 g of Tricyclazole technical was charged into a ribbon blender and was ground to obtain Mixture D in the form of wettable powder having particle size in the range of 2 micron to 15 micron. Mixture D was then charged in to Mixture C in a rotating blender for 60 minutes to obtain coated granules. 22.0 g of Clay was blended with the coated granules for 30 minutes to obtain the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure in the form of encapsulated granules.
The GR compositions obtained in experiments 1 and 2 were subjected to accelerated storage study (temperature of 54 °C for 14 days), and the result obtained is summarized in Table-1.
Table-1
Actives Experiment-1 Experiment-2
Initial After ageing Initial After ageing
Cartap hydrochloride content 4.03 4.03 4.03 4.03
Hexaconazole content 0.45 0.43 0.82 0.80
Tricyclazole content 1.22 1.21 2.52 2.50

It is seen from Table-1 that there was no significant decrease in the amount of the actives after the storage period, thus indicating that the pesticidal composition prepared of the present disclosure was stable. Further, the bio-efficacy of the pesticidal composition was also retained after the storage period.
Experiment-3: Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP
495 g of clay, 20 g of sodium lauryl sulphate, 20 g of silica were charged in to a ribbon blender and blended for 2 hours to obtain Mixture A. 270 g of cartap hydrochloride, 28 g of Hexaconazole technical, and 112 g of Tricyclazole technical was added to Mixture A and blended for 3 hours to obtain Mixture B. 10 g of phosphoric acid, 10 g of propol PAP and 5 g of Propol PAD were charged to Mixture B and was blended for one hour. The obtained mixture was then ground in a jet mill to reduce the particle size in the range of 2 micron to 15 micron. The milled mixture was further blended with 30 g of Tamol 8906 to obtain the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure in wettable powder form.
Experiment-4: Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP
247 g of clay, 248 g of sodium sulphate, 20 g of sodium lauryl sulphate, 20 g of silica were charged in to a ribbon blender and blended for 2 hours to obtain Mixture A. 270 g of cartap hydrochloride, 28 g of Hexaconazole technical, 112 g of Tricyclazole technical was added to Mixture A and blended for 3 hours to obtain Mixture B. 10 g of phosphoric acid, 10 g of propol PAP and 5 g of Propol PAD were charged to Mixture B and blended for one hour. The obtained mixture was then ground in jet mill to reduce the particle size in the range of 2 micron to 15 micron. The milled mixture was further blended with 30 g of Morwet D425 to obtain the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure in wettable powder form.
Experiment-5: Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 1.25 % + Tricyclazole 5.25% WP
285 g of clay, 280 g of sodium sulphate, 20 g of sodium lauryl sulphate, 20 g of silica were charged in to a ribbon blender and blended for 2 hours to obtain Mixture A. 270 g of cartap hydrochloride, 14 g of Hexaconazole technical, and 56 g of Tricyclazole technical were added to Mixture A and was blended for 3 hours to obtain Mixture B. 10 g of phosphoric acid, 10 g of propol PAP and 5 g of Propol PAD were charged to Mixture B and blended for one hour. The obtained mixture was then ground in jet mill to reduce the particle size in the range of 2 micron to 15 micron. The milled mixture was further blended with 30 g of Tamol 8906 to obtain the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure in wettable powder form.
Experiment-6: Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Prothioconazole 0.8% + Tricyclazole 2.5% GR
4.5 g of phosphoric acid 10.50 g of propol PAP, 5.5 g of Propol PAD and 6.3 g of Acid green 25 were charged in a metal drum fitted with heating coil and was blended for 30 minutes at a temperature of 60 °C to obtain Mixture A. 600 g of river sand was charged into the rotating blender. Mixture A was further heated to 65 °C and then sprayed over river sand in the rotating blender to obtain Mixture B. Mixture B was then cooled to 30 °C and further 266.0 g of river sand was charged into the rotating blender and mixed for 30 minutes to obtain Mixture C. 42.30 g of Cartap hydrochloride, 9.0 g of Prothioconazole technical, and 26.35 g of Tricyclazole technical was charged into a ribbon blender and was ground to obtain Mixture D in the form of wettable powder having particle size in the range of 2 micron to 15 micron. Mixture D was then charged in to Mixture C in a rotating blender for 60 minutes and 29.55 g of Clay was mixed and the mixture was blended for 30 minutes to obtain the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure in the form of encapsulated granules.
Experiment-7: Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Difenoconazole 0.8% + Tricyclazole 2.5% GR
5 g of phosphoric acid 10.00 g of propol PAP, 5.5 g of Propol PAD and 6.5 g of Acid green 25 were charged in a metal drum fitted with heating coil and was blended for 30 minutes at a temperature of 60 °C to obtain Mixture A. 650 g of river sand was charged into the rotating blender. Mixture A was further heated to 65 °C and then sprayed over river sand in the rotating blender to obtain Mixture B. Mixture B was then cooled to 30 °C and further 213.35 g of river sand was charged into the rotating blender and mixed for 30 minutes to obtain Mixture C. 42.30 g of Cartap hydrochloride, 9.0 g of Difenoconazole technical, and 26.35 g of Tricyclazole technical was charged into a ribbon blender and was ground to obtain Mixture D in the form of wettable powder having particle size in the range of 2 micron to 15 micron. Mixture D was then charged in to Mixture C in a rotating blender for 60 minutes and 30 g of Clay and 2 g was mixed and the mixture was blended for 30 minutes to obtain the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure in the form of encapsulated granules.
Experiment-8: Study of bioefficacy and phytotoxicity of the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure in the form of encapsulated granules (experiment-1 and experiment-2)
The details of the crop used, the target pests, the application duration, and the treatment details of the pesticidal composition used are summarized in Tables 2-4.
The pesticidal composition of experiment-1 (Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.4% + Tricyclazole 1.2% GR) and experiment-2 (Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.8% + Tricyclazole 2.5% GR) were used in this study.
Table-2
a)
b) Crop
Variety/Cultivar :
: Paddy (Oryza sativa)
Ganga Kaveri, Paddy
c) Date of Transplanting : 18/12/2016
d) Target pest
: Stem borer (Scirpophaga incertulas),
Leaf folder (Cnaphalocrocis medinalis ),
Sheath Blight (Rhizoctonia solani)
Blast (Pyricularia oryzae)
e) Plot Size : 5 m X 6 m (30 sq. m.)
f) Spacing : 10 cm X 15 cm
g) Design of Experiment : Randomized Block Design (RBD)
h) No. of Treatments : 7 (Bioefficacy), 5 (Phytotoxicity)
i) No. of Replications : 3
j) Cropping Season : Rabi2016-17
k) Number of Applications : 2 applications at an interval of 30 days
l) Date of Applications : 1st - 08/01/2017 (Maximum tillering stage)
2nd - 06/02/2017 (Panicle initiation stage)
m) Method of Application : Soil Application by direct broad casting of GR formulations and WP/SC mixed with sand and broad casted in soil.
n) Water volume for spray : NA
o)

p)

q) Time of observation

Package of Practices

Date of Harvesting :

:

: Bio-efficacy- Before 1st application and 10, 15 & 20 days after 1st application and 0, 5, 10 & 15 days after 2nd application
Phyto-toxicity- 1, 3, 5, 7, 10 & 15 days after application
All universally recommended package of practices were followed to grow the crop

25/04/2017

Table-3: Bio-efficacy Treatment Details
Tr. No Treatment Details Dose
(g a.i./ha) Dose
(ml or g/ha)

T1 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.8% + Tricyclazole 2.5% GR (Experiment-2) 1000 + 200 + 625 25000
T2 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.4% + Tricyclazole 1.2% GR (Experiment-1) 1000+ 100+ 300 25000
T3 Cartap hydrochloride 4% GR + Hexaconazole 5% SC + Tricyclazole 75% WP (Tank Mix) 1000+ 200+ 625 25000+ 4000+833
T4 Cartap hydrochloride 4% GR 1000 25000
T5 Hexaconazole 5% SC (Soil application) 200 4000
T6 Tricyclazole 75% WP (Soil application) 625 833
T7 Untreated control - -

Table-4: Phytotoxicity Treatment Details
Tr. No Treatment Details Dose
(g a.i./ha) Dose
(ml or g/ha)

T1 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.8% + Tricyclazole 2.5% GR (Experiment-2) 1000 + 200 + 625 25000
T2 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.4% + Tricyclazole 1.2% GR (Experiment-1) 1000+ 100+ 300 25000
T3 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.8% + Tricyclazole 2.5% GR (Experiment-2) 2000 + 400 + 1250 50000
T4 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.4% + Tricyclazole 1.2% GR (Experiment-1) 2000 + 200 + 600 50000
T5 Untreated control - -

A ready granular formulation test Insecticide (1) + Fungicide (2), the three way combinations of Cartap hydrochloride (I) + Hexaconazole (F) + Tricyclazole (F) were tested at given concentrations with Ready mix combination of Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.8% + Tricyclazole 2.5% GR (Experiment-2), Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.4% + Tricyclazole 1.2% GR (Experiment-1) along with solo insecticide i e. Cartap hydrochloride 4% GR and Fungicides i.e., Hexaconazole 5% SC & Tricyclazole 75% WP and Untreated Control against Stem Borer, Leaf Folder, Sheath Blight & Leaf Blast on Paddy. All the test products were applied as broadcasting in soil application as preventive in the field. Two applications were given at an interval of 30 days.
One day prior of the initiation of the experiment, pest incidences were recorded, and subsequent observations were recorded after 10, 15 and 20 days after first application and 0, 5, 10 & 15 days after 2nd application. For Stem Borer (Dead hearts & White ears per hill was recorded), Leaf Folder (Number of newly infected leaves) were counted on 10 pre-tagged hills per plot. For Sheath Blight and Leaf Blast, the disease rating (Scale 0-9) was used and calculated PDI as formula given below. Mean PDI values were derived for the treatments and used for Statistical analysis of the data.
The standard Disease Rating Scale for Paddy Blast is given below:

Disease Rating Leaf blast
0 No lesions observed
1 Small brown specks of pin-point size or larger brown specks without sporulating center
2 Small roundish to slightly elongated, necrotic gray spots, about 1-2 mm in diameter, with a distinct brown margin
3 Lesion type is the same as in scale 2,but a significant number of lesions are on the upper leaves
4 Typical susceptible blast lesions 3mm or longer, infecting less than 4% of the leaf area
5 Typical blast lesions infecting 4-10% of the leaf area
6 Typical blast lesions infecting 11-25% of the leaf area
7 Typical blast lesions infecting 26-50% of the leaf area
8 Typical blast lesions infecting 51-75% of the leaf area and many leaves are dead
9 >75% leaf area affected

The standard for Disease Rating Scale for Paddy Sheath Blight is given below:
SCALE (relative lesion height: disease progress relative to plant height
0 No infection observed
1 Lesions limited to lower 20% of plant height
3 20-30%
5 31-45%
7 46-65%
9 More than 65%
Percent disease index (PDI) was calculated using the following formula:
Sum of all numerical ratings
PDI = --------------------------------------------------------------------- X 100
Total plants observed X Maximum rating scale

Paddy yield from each net plot was recorded at harvesting and weighed separately. Total yield from each net plot was calculated and computed on hectare basis (Kg/ha) and statistical analyzed the data.
Observations were taken on damage caused to plants, if any, by the application of different treatments by taking into the account phytotoxic symptoms viz. leaf injury on tips and leaf surface, wilting, vein clearing, necrosis, Epinasty and hyponasty on ten plants per plot. The observations were recorded before spray and 1, 3, 5, 7 & 10th day after applications. For Phytotoxicity study on leaf injury on tips and leaf surface the Scale (0-10) used is given below.
The standard Phytotoxicity Rating Scale (PRS) is given below:
Crop response/ Crop injury Rating
0-00 0
1-10% 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
91-100% 10

The statistical analysis of variance was calculated by using MS- Excel Computer Program and the results are summarized in Tables 5 to 10.
Observation:
a) Bio-efficacy of the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure against Stem borer
It is seen from Table-5 that at the time of initiation of trial there was no pest population in any of the treatment. At 10 days after first application Dead hearts were noticed but the count was non-significant across the treatments. All the insecticides (Cartap Hydrochloride) were capable of significantly reduction in the Stem borer population at 15 and 20 DAA as compared to the Untreated Control and Fungicide applications but the significant lowest number of Dead hearts was observed in T1 (0.84/ hill), which was at par with T2 (0.86/ hill) and T4 (0.95) and found superior over rest of the treatments at 20 Days after first application (DAA).
After second application of the pesticidal composition, the Stem Borer incidences were recorded as No of White ears. At 0, 5 and 10 DSA there was no White ears observed. Only at 15 DSA were noticed as lowest number was found in treatment T1 (0.98/ hill), which was at par T2 (1.03/ hill), T3 (1.19/ hill) and T4 (1.03) were on par with each other in controlling Dead hearts due to Stem borer. In treatment T7 Untreated Control highest number of Dead hearts was noticed (2.23/ hill).

Table-5: Bio-efficacy of different treatments against Stem Borer (Scirpophaga incertulas) of Paddy
S. No. Treatments DOSE/ ha 1st application 2nd application
No. of Dead hearts/ Hill
(Avg. Mean) No. of White ears /Hill
(Avg. Mean)
g a.i. Formulation (g/ml) 0
DAA 10
DAA 15
DAA 20
DAA 0
DSA 5
DSA 10
DSA 15
DSA
T1 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.8% + Tricyclazole 2.5% GR (Experiment-2) 1000 + 200 + 625 25000 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.71) 0.04
(0.73) 0.20
(0.84) 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.00) 0.47
(0.98)
T2 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.4% + Tricyclazole 1.2% GR (Experiment-1) 1000 + 100 + 300 25000 0.00
(0.00) 0.04
(0.73) 0.10
(0.77) 0.24
(0.86) 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.00) 0.60
(1.03)
T3 Cartap hydrochloride 4% GR + Hexaconazole 5% SC + Tricyclazole 75% WP (Tank Mix) 1000 + 200 + 625 25000+ 4000+833 0.00
(0.00) 0.17
(0.82) 0.57
(1.04) 0.67
(1.08) 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.00) 0.94
(1.19)
T4 Cartap hydrochloride 4% GR 1000 25000 0.00
(0.00) 0.07
(0.76) 0.30
(0.89) 0.40
(0.95) 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.00) 0.60
(1.03)
T5 Hexaconazole 5% SC (Sand mix and soil application) 200 4000 0.00
(0.00) 1.07
(1.25) 1.90
(1.55) 2.24
(1.65) 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.00) 3.80
(2.08)
T6 Tricyclazole 75% WP (Sand mix and soil application) 625 833 0.00
(0.00) 1.27
(1.33) 2.30
(1.66) 2.67
(1.77) 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.00) 4.27
(2.19)
T7 Untreated control - - 0.00
(0.00) 1.07
(1.26) 2.67
(1.78) 2.87
(1.84) 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.00) 4.47
(2.23)
CD @ 5 % NS NS 0.21 0.29 NS NS NS 0.30
Figures in parenthesis are square root transformed values. DAA- Days After First Application, DSA- Days After Second Application, NS- Non significant
b) Bio-efficacy of the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure against Leaf Folder
It is seen from Table-6 that at the time of initiation of trial there was no pest observed. At 10 days after first application, the highest number of Leaf Folder was recorded in control (1.79/ Hill). The significant lowest leaf infestation was observed in T1, T2 and T4 and T3 (0.71, 0.71, 0.71 & 0.91/Hill respectively). At 15 DAA, T1 and T2 were found significant lowest leaf infestation (0.71/ hill both) which were significantly superior over all the rest treatments. On 20 DAA similar trends of observation were observed as of 10 DAA.
At 0 days after second application, lowest infestation of leaves found in T1 (1.20/ hill) which was at par with T2 (1.33/ hill) and significantly superior over all the rest treatments. On 5 DSA, T1 was lowest infestation (0.76/hill) which was at par with T3 and T4 (0.79/hill both and T2 (0.87/hill). At 10 DSA T1, T4, T3 and T2 (0.80, 0.84, 0.88 & 0.87/ hill respectively) performed the best and were at par with each other and significantly superior over rest treatments. Similar trend were observed at 15 DSA where T2, T4, T3 and T1 showed least infestation (0.95, 0.98, 0.98, 0.99/ hill respectively) which were at par with each other and significantly superior over rest treatments. In Untreated Control highest leaf infestation recorded (4.04/ hill).
Table-6: Bio-efficacy of different treatments against Leaf Folder (Cnaphalocrocis medinalis) of Paddy
S.
No. Treatments DOSE/ ha 1st application 2nd application
No. Infected Leaves /Hill
(Avg. Mean) No. Infected Leaves /Hill
(Avg. Mean)
g a.i. Formulation (g/ml) 0
DAA 10 DAA 15 DAA 20 DAA 0
DSA 5
DSA 10 DSA 15
DSA
T1 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.8% + Tricyclazole 2.5% GR (Experiment-2) 1000 + 200 + 625 25000 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.71) 0.00
(0.71) 0.20
(0.84) 0.94
(1.2) 0.07
(0.76) 0.14
(0.8) 0.47
(0.99)
T2 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.4% + Tricyclazole 1.2% GR (Experiment-) 1000+ 100+ 300 25000 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.71) 0.00
(0.71) 0.44
(0.97) 1.27
(1.33) 0.27
(0.87) 0.27
(0.88) 0.40
(0.95)
T3 Cartap hydrochloride 4% GR + Hexaconazole 5% SC + Tricyclazole 75% WP (Tank Mix) 1000+ 200+ 625 25000+ 4000+833 0.00
(0.00) 0.34
(0.91) 0.44
(0.97) 1.6
(1.44) 4.54
(2.23) 0.14
(0.79) 0.27
(0.87) 0.47
(0.98)
T4 Cartap hydrochloride 4% GR 1000 25000 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.71) 0.14
(0.8) 0.87
(1.16) 2.74
(1.77) 0.14
(0.79) 0.20
(0.84) 0.47
(0.98)
T5 Hexaconazole 5% SC (Sand mix and soil application) 200 4000 0.00
(0.00) 1.60
(1.45) 3.64
(2.04) 4.47
(2.22) 12.34
(3.58) 13.27
(3.71) 13.67
(3.77) 14.20
(3.84)
T6 Tricyclazole 75% WP (Sand mix and soil application) 625 833 0.00
(0.00) 1.07
(1.25) 4.3
(2.2) 5.00
(2.34) 13.8
(3.79) 14.20
(3.84) 14.54
(3.88) 15.14
(3.96)
T7 Untreated control - - 0.00
(0.00) 2.70
(1.79) 4.4
(2.22) 5.54
(2.46) 14.34
(3.86) 14.70
(3.9) 15.07
(3.95) 15.80
(4.04)
CD @ 5 % NS 0.20 0.21 0.36 0.47 0.25 0.23 0.25
Figures in parenthesis are square root transformed values. DAA- Days After First Application, DSA- Days After Second Application, NS- Non significant

c) Bio-efficacy of the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure against Sheath Blight
It is seen from Table-7 that at 10 days after first application, the highest percent disease incidence (PDI) of Sheath Blight was recorded in Untreated Control (14.83%). The significant lowest Sheath Blight was observed in T1 (0.00%) which was at par with T2 (0.00%) and significantly superior over rest of the treatments. Similar pattern of observations were recorded on 15 and 20 days after first application.
After second application at 0 DSA, treatment T1, T2 and T3 were having lowest PDI (23.01, 23.08 & 25.44% respectively) which were at par with each other and significantly superior over rest of the treatments. Similar type of observations was recorded for 10 and 15 DSA. At final observation T7 Untreated Control recorded the highest PDI (51.35%).
Table-7: Bio-efficacy of different treatments against Sheath Blight (Rhizoctonia solani) of Paddy
S.
No. Treatments DOSE/ ha 1st application 2nd application
Avg. Mean (PDI) Avg. Mean (PDI)
g a.i. Formulation (g/ml) 0
DAA 10 DAA 15 DAA 20 DAA 0
DSA 5
DSA 10 DSA 15
DSA
T1 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.8% + Tricyclazole 2.5% GR (Experiment-2) 1000 + 200 + 625 25000 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 5.56
(13.49) 15.56
(23.01) 3.71
(10.98) 9.63
(18.06) 23.71
(28.78)
T2 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.4% + Tricyclazole 1.2% GR (Experiment-1) 1000+ 100+ 300 25000 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 0.75
(2.86) 7.41
(15.76) 16.30
(23.8) 3.71
(10.98) 10.38
(18.52) 25.19
(29.95)
T3 Cartap hydrochloride 4% GR + Hexaconazole 5% SC + Tricyclazole 75% WP (Tank Mix) 1000+ 200+ 625 25000+ 4000+833 0.00
(0.0) 2.60
(8.58) 8.89
(17.27) 17.04
(24.00) 18.52
(25.44) 6.67
(14.83) 10.38
(18.62) 31.12
(33.88)
T4 Cartap hydrochloride 4% GR 1000 25000 0.00
(0.0) 7.41
(15.76) 25.56
(30.3) 44.08
(41.53) 68.89
(56.49) 59.26
(50.41) 62.23
(52.2) 54.82
(47.8)
T5 Hexaconazole 5% SC (Sand mix and soil application) 200 4000 0.00
(0.0) 2.23
(8.10) 7.04
(15.1) 14.82
(22.15) 25.19
(39.89) 13.34
(21.27) 18.52
(25.17) 45.93
(40.49)
T6 Tricyclazole 75% WP (Sand mix and soil application) 625 833 0.00
(0.0) 5.56
(13.49) 21.86
(26.53) 37.04
(37.41) 62.23
(52.14) 51.86
(46.1) 54.82
(47.83) 46.67
(43.07)
T7 Untreated control - - 0.00
(0.0) 6.67
(14.83) 28.15
(32.01) 51.12
(45.65) 73.34
(59.17) 65.19
(54.01) 68.89
(56.28) 60.75
(51.35)
CD @ 5 % NS 4.56 10.23 9.72 10.47 14.82 9.40 11.40
Figures in parenthesis are arcsine transformed values. DAA- Days After First Application, DSA- Days After Second Application, NS- Non significant

d) Bio-efficacy of the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure against Leaf Blast
It is seen from Table-8 that at the time of initiation of trial, the PDI was uniform prevalent across the plot and was building up. At 10 days after first application, the highest percent of Leaf Blast was recorded in untreated control (21.17%). The significant lowest Leaf blast was observed in T1, T2 and T3 (0.00%) which was significantly superior over rest of the treatments. On 15 DAA, lowest disease pressure was recorded in treatment T1 (2.02%) which was at par with treatment T2 (2.86) and significantly superior over rest of the treatments. Similar kind of disease pressure noticed at 20 days after first application.
After second application also same trend was observed where T1 and T2 were the best treatments and significantly superior over rest of the treatments. Untreated Control recorded the highest PDI (55.21%) at 15 DSA.
Table-8: Bio-efficacy of different treatments against Leaf Blast (Pyricularia oryzae) of Paddy
S. No. Treatments DOSE/ ha 1st application 2nd application
Avg. Mean (PDI) Avg. Mean (PDI)
g a.i. Formulation (g/ml) 0
DAA 10 DAA 15 DAA 20 DAA 0
DSA 5
DSA 10 DSA 15
DSA
T1 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.8% + Tricyclazole 2.5% GR (Experiment-2) 1000 + 200 + 625 25000 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 0.38
(2.02) 4.45
(11.91) 10.38
(18.77) 2.97
(9.78) 7.41
(15.76) 15.56
(23.2)
T2 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.4% + Tricyclazole 1.2% GR (Experiment-1) 1000+ 100+ 300 25000 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 0.75
(2.86) 6.67
(14.61) 12.6
(20.48) 2.97
(9.78) 8.15
(16.47) 20.00
(26.48)
T3 Cartap hydrochloride 4% GR + Hexaconazole 5% SC + Tricyclazole 75% WP (Tank Mix) 1000+ 200+ 625 25000+ 4000+833 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 17.04
(24.31) 19.63
(26.23) 35.56
(36.6) 14.82
(22.63) 29.63
(32.97) 33.34
(35.25)
T4 Cartap hydrochloride 4% GR 1000 25000 0.00
(0.0) 8.15
(16.19) 24.82
(29.86) 60
(50.87) 79.26
(63.17) 68.15
(55.73) 74.08
(59.52) 65.19
(53.95)
T5 Hexaconazole 5% SC (Sand mix and soil application) 200 4000 0.00
(0.0) 5.93
(13.84) 27.04
(31.3) 56.67
(48.85) 69.63
(56.6) 62.23
(52.1) 65.19
(53.87) 60.75
(51.24)
T6 Tricyclazole 75% WP (Sand mix and soil application) 625 833 0.00
(0.0) 3.34
(10.07) 18.89
(25.36) 26.67
(30.9) 31.49
(34.08) 3.71
(10.98) 7.41
(15.76) 41.49
(40.09)
T7 Untreated control - - 0(0) 13.71
(21.17) 45.56
(42.44) 62.23
(52.1) 78.52
(62.47) 71.49
(57.8) 73.34
(59.00) 67.41
(55.21)
CD @ 5 % NS 6.77 5.87 6.02 6.19 4.38 4.47 5.98
Figures in parenthesis are arcsine transformed values. DAA- Days After First Application, DSA- Days After Second Application, NS- Non significant
e) Effect of the pesticidal composition on yield
Table-9: Bio-efficacy of different treatments against yield of Paddy
S. No. Treatment DOSE/ ha Mean Yield
(Kg/ha)
g a.i. Formulation (g/ml)
T1 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.8% + Tricyclazole 2.5% GR (Experiment-2) 1000 + 200 + 625 25000 5333
T2 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.4% + Tricyclazole 1.2% GR (Experiment-1) 1000+ 100+ 300 25000 4733
T3 Cartap hydrochloride 4% GR + Hexaconazole 5% SC + Tricyclazole 75% WP (Tank Mix) 1000+ 200+ 625 25000+ 4000+833 4600
T4 Cartap hydrochloride 4% GR 1000 25000 3933
T5 Hexaconazole 5% SC (Sand mix and soil application) 200 4000 4300
T6 Tricyclazole 75% WP (Sand mix and soil application) 625 833 4533
T7 Untreated control - - 3593
CD @ 5 % 427
It is seen from Table-9 that all the treatments significantly increases the yield as compared to Untreated Control (3593 Kg/ha). The highest yield was observed in treatment T1 (5333 Kg/ha), which was significantly superior over rest of the treatments followed by T2 (4733 Kg/ha).
f) Phytotoxicity
The pesticidal compositions of the present disclosure were applied to check the phytotoxic effects like leaf injury on tips/surface, vein clearing, necrosis, hyponasty and epinasty on the Paddy crop at X and 2X dosages. The observations on these phytotoxicity parameters were observed before application of the pesticide and at 3, 5, 7 and 10 days after application.
Table-10: Phyto-toxicity effect of different treatments on Paddy

S. No. Treatment Details
Dose *Phytotoxicity
(Based on 0-10 Phytotoxicity Rating Scale)
g a.i./ha g/ha Before Spray Days after application (DAA)
1 3 5 7 10
T1 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.8% + Tricyclazole 2.5% GR (Experiment-2) 1000 + 200 + 625 25000 0 0 0 0 0 0
T2 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.4% + Tricyclazole 1.2% GR (Experiment-1) 1000+ 100+ 300 25000 0 0 0 0 0 0
T3 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.8% + Tricyclazole 2.5% GR (Experiment-2) 2000 + 400 + 1250 50000 0 0 0 0 0 0
T4 Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.4% + Tricyclazole 1.2% GR (Experiment-1) 2000 + 200 + 600 50000 0 0 0 0 0 0
T5 Untreated control - - 0 0 0 0 0 0
*For phototoxic symptoms- Leaf injury on tips and Leaf surface, Wilting, Vein Clearing, Necrosis, Epinasty and Hyponasty

It is seen from Table-10 that there was no phytotoxicity observed on the crop after application of any of the treatment. There was no adverse effect noticed on the Paddy crop in the field applied with the hereinabove mentioned treatments.
It is clearly seen from the above studies that the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure is effective against insect pests and diseases of Paddy. It is observed Cartap hydrochloride 4% + Hexaconazole 0.8% + Tricyclazole 2.5% GR (Experiment-2) provides the most effective control insect pests and diseases. The efficacy of the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure (Cartap hydrochloride + Hexaconazole + Tricyclazole) is far better than the commercially available pesticides, such as Cartap hydrochloride 4% GR, Hexaconazole 5% SC, Tricyclazole 75% WP and their tank mix combination for controlling pest complex of Paddy. It is also observed that as the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure provided significantly improved bio-efficacy and hence is capable of producing higher Paddy yield. Further, there is no phytotoxicity effect of the insecticidal composition on Paddy. The pesticidal composition of the present disclosure exhibits synergistic effect in controlling the pests of paddy crop, and can be used effectively and safely used for the management of pests as compared to individual use of Cartap HCl, hexaconazole and tricyclazole alone.
Experiment-9: Study of bioefficacy and phytotoxicity of the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure in the form of wettable powder (experiments 3-5)
The details of the crop used, the target pests, the application duration, and the treatment details of the pesticidal composition used are summarized in Tables 11-13
The pesticidal composition of experiment-3 (Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP), experiment-4 (Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP), and experiment-5 (Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 1.25 % + Tricyclazole 5.25% WP) were used in this study.
Table-11:
a) Crop : Paddy (Oryza sativa)
b)
c) Variety/Cultivar
Date of Transplanting :
: Ganga Kaveri, Paddy
14/12/2016
d) Target pest
: Stem borer (Scirpophaga incertulas),
Leaf folder (Cnaphalocrocis medinalis ),
Sheath Blight (Rhizoctonia solani)
Blast (Pyricularia oryzae)
e) Plot Size : 5 m X 6 m (30 sq. m.)
f) Spacing : 10 cm X 15 cm
g) Design of Experiment : Randomized Block Design (RBD)
h) No. of Treatments : 7 (Bioefficacy), 3 (Phytotoxicity)
i) No. of Replications : 3
j) Cropping Season : Rabi 2016-17
k) Number of Applications : 2 applications at an interval of 20 days
l) Date of Applications : 1st - 01/02/2017
2nd - 21/02/2017
m) Method of Application : By Knapsack Sprayer fitted with hallow cone nozzle
n) Water volume for spray : 500 L/ha
o)

p)

q) Time of observation

Package of Practices

Date of Harvesting :

:

: Bio-efficacy- Before 1st Spray and 5, 10 & 15 days after each sprays
Phyto-toxicity- 1, 3, 5, 7, 10 & 15 days after application
All university recommended package of practices were followed to grow the crop
08/04/2017

Table-12: Bio-efficacy Treatment Details
Tr. No Treatment Details Dose
(g a.i./ha) Dose
(ml or g/ha)

T1 Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-3) 500+50+200 2000
T2 Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-4) 500+50+200 2000
T3 Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 1.25% + Tricyclazole 5.25% WP (Experiment-5) 500+25+105 2000
T4 Cartap hydrochloride 50% SP 500 1000
T5 Hexaconazole 5% SC 50 1000
T6 Tricyclazole 75% WP 225 300
T7 Untreated control - -

Table-13: Phytotoxicity Treatment Details
Tr. No Treatment Details Dose
(g a.i./ha) Dose
(ml or g/ha)

T1 Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-3) 500+50+200 2000
T2 Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-4) 500+50+200 2000
T3 Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 1.25% + Tricyclazole 5.25% WP (Experiment-5) 500+25+105 2000
T4 Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-3) 1000+100+400 4000
T5 Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-4) 1000+100+400 4000
T6 Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 1.25% + Tricyclazole 5.25% WP (Experiment-5) 1000+50+210 4000
T7 Untreated control - -

A ready formulations of test Insecticide (1) + Fungicides (2), the three way combinations of Cartap hydrochloride (I) + Hexaconazole (F) + Tricyclazole (F) were tested at given concentrations i e. Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-3), Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-4) & Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 1.25% + Tricyclazole 5.25% WP (Experiment-5) along with solo individual Insecticide, Cartap hydrochloride 50% WP & Fungicides Hexaconazole 5% SC & Tricyclazole 75% WP and Untreated Control against Lepidopteran pests (Stem Borer & Leaf Folder) and diseases (Sheath Blight & Blast) of Paddy. The test products were applied as foliar spray with Knapsack Sprayer fitted with hollow cone nozzle. The application was initiated with the incidence of pests in the field. Two applications were given at an interval of 20 days.
One day prior of the initiation of the experiment, pest incidences were recorded, and subsequent observations was recorded after 5, 10 and 15 days of each spray. The Stem Borer & Leaf folder incidence was recorded as Dead hearts, White ears and newly infected leaves respectively on 10 pre-tagged hills per plot. And for Blast & Sheath Blight the observations were recorded on 10 pre-tagged hills per plot based on the disease rating scale as given below. The PDI was calculated as per given formula. Mean values were derived for the treatment and used for Statistical Analysis of the data.
The standard Disease Rating Scale for Paddy Blast is given below:
Disease Rating Leaf blast
0 No lesions observed
1 Small brown specks of pin-point size or larger brown specks without sporulating center
2 Small roundish to slightly elongated, necrotic gray spots, about 1-2 mm in diameter, with a distinct brown margin
3 Lesion type is the same as in scale 2,but a significant number of lesions are on the upper leaves
4 Typical susceptible blast lesions 3mm or longer, infecting less than 4% of the leaf area
5 Typical blast lesions infecting 4-10% of the leaf area
6 Typical blast lesions infecting 11-25% of the leaf area
7 Typical blast lesions infecting 26-50% of the leaf area
8 Typical blast lesions infecting 51-75% of the leaf area and many leaves are dead
9 >75% leaf area affected

The standard for Disease Rating Scale for Paddy Sheath Blight is given below:
SCALE (relative lesion height: disease progress relative to plant height
0 No infection observed
1 Lesions limited to lower 20% of plant height
3 20-30%
5 31-45%
7 46-65%
9 More than 65%

Percent disease index (PDI) was calculated using the following formula:
Sum of all numerical ratings
PDI = --------------------------------------------------------------------- X 100
Total plants observed X Maximum rating scale

Individual plot wise yield was recorded and calculated treatment wise mean yield and converted into yield per hectare (Kg/ha) and statistically analyzed the mean data.
Observations were taken on damage caused to Paddy crop, if any, by the application of different treatments by taking into the account phytotoxic symptoms viz. leaf injury on tips and leaf surface, wilting, vein clearing, necrosis, epinasty and hyponasty on ten plants per plot. The observations were recorded before spray and 1, 3, 5, 7 & 10th day after applications. For Phytotoxicity study on leaf injury on tips and leaf surface the Scale (0-10) used is given below.
The standard Phytotoxicity Rating Scale (PRS) is given below:
Crop response/ Crop injury Rating
0-00 0
1-10% 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
91-100% 10

The statistical analysis of variance was calculated by using MS- Excel Computer Program and the results are summarized in Tables 14-19.
Observation:
a) Bio-efficacy of the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure against Stem borer
it is seen from Table-14 that at the time of initiation of trial there was non- significant pest population in all the treatments. After first application the observations were recorded for Dead hearts. At 5 days after first application, the lowest Dead hearts were recorded in T1, T2, T3 & T4 (0.71/hill), which was at par with each other. And all these insecticide (Cartap hydrochloride) included treatments significantly reduced the Stem borer population than Untreated Control and only Fungicide applications (T5 & T6). Similar observation trend was observed in 10 & 15 days after first application.
After second application the observations were recorded for White ears. At 0, 5 & 10 days after second application there was no White ears observed in any of the treatment. Only 15 days after second application the White ears were observed. Where, the lowest White ears were recorded in T1, T2, T3 & T4 (0.91, 0.76, 0.76 & 0.88 respectively), which were at par with each other and significantly superior over Untreated Control and only Fungicide treatments (T5 & T6).

Table-14: Bio-efficacy of different treatments of tests products against Stem Borer of Paddy
Treatment DOSE/ ha 1st application 2nd application
No. of Dead hearts/Hill (Avg. Mean) No. of White ears/Hill (Avg. Mean)
g a.i. Formulation (g/ml) 0 DAFA 5
DAFA 10
DAFA 15
DAFA 0 DASA 5 DASA 10
DASA 15
DASA
T1: Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP ( Experiment-3) 500+50+200 2000 0.00
(0.71) 0.00
(0.71) 0.2
(0.84) 0.4
(0.95) 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 0.34
(0.91)
T2: Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP ( Experiment-4) 500+50+200 2000 0.00
(0.71) 0.00
(0.71) 0.07
(0.76) 0.2
(0.84) 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 0.07
(0.76)
T3: Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 1.25% + Tricyclazole 5.25% WP ( Experiment-5) 500+25+105 2000 0.00
(0.71) 0.00
(0.71) 0.44
(0.97) 0.67
(1.08) 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 0.07
(0.76)
T4: Cartap hydrochloride 50% SP 500 1000 0.00
(0.71) 0.00
(0.71) 0.2
(0.84) 1.47
(1.39) 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 0.27
(0.88)
T5: Hexaconazole 5% SC 50 1000 0.00
(0.71) 0.6
(1.05) 1.2
(1.3) 2.2
(1.64) 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 3.14
(1.9)
T6: Tricyclazole 75% WP 225 300 0.07
(0.76) 0.6
(1.05) 1.64
(1.45) 2.14
(1.62) 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 2.07
(1.61)
T7: Untreated control - - 0.00
(0.71) 1.17
(1.29) 2.00
(1.59) 2.87
(1.84) 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 0.00
(0.0) 2.6
(1.77)
CD @ 5 % NS 0.10 0.25 0.27 NS NS NS 0.22
Figures in parenthesis are square root transformed values. DAA- Days After First Application, DSA- Days After Second Application, NS- Non significant

b) Bio-efficacy of the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure against Leaf Folder
it is seen from Table-15 that at the time of initiation of the trial incidence of Leaf Folder were started but there was no significant difference between the treatments which indicates the uniform prevalence of the pest. At 5 days after first application, the lowest infected leaves were recorded in T1, T2 & T3 (0.71/Hill), which were at par with each other and significantly superior over T4 (1.00/Hill) and only fungicide treatments i.e., T5 & T6 (2.93 & 2.0 /Hill respectively) and Untreated Control i.e. T7 (2.78/Hill). The similar trends of observations were observed on 10 & 15 days after first application.
But at 0, 5, 10 & 15 days after second application, the lowest infested leaves were recorded in T1, T2, T3 & T4, which were at par with each other and significantly superior over Untreated Control and only Fungicide treatments (T5 & T6).
Table-15: Bio-efficacy of different treatments of tests products against Leaf Folder of Paddy
Treatment DOSE/ ha 1st Application 2nd Application
No. of Infected leaf/Hill (Avg. Mean) No. of Infected leaf/Hill (Avg. Mean)
g a.i. Formulation (g/ml) 0
DAFA 5
DAFA 10
DAFA 15
DAFA 0
DASA 5
DASA 10
DASA 15
DASA
T1: Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-3) 500+50+200 2000 3.47
(1.95) 0.00
(0.71) 0.20
(0.84) 0.60
(1.05) 1.74
(1.49) 0.17
(0.82) 0.47
(0.98) 0.80
(1.14)
T2: Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-4) 500+50+200 2000 6.00
(2.54) 0.00
(0.71) 0.00
(0.71) 0.30
(0.90) 1.54
(1.42) 0.00
(0.71) 0.20
(0.84) 0.47
(0.99)
T3: Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 1.25% + Tricyclazole 5.25% WP (Experiment-5) 500+25+105 2000 5.67
(2.48) 0.00
(0.71) 0.34
(0.92) 0.80
(1.15) 1.80
(1.52) 0.00
(0.71) 0.40
(0.95) 0.54
(1.02)
T4: Cartap hydrochloride 50% SP 500 1000 5.00
(2.33) 0.50
(1.00) 1.60
(1.45) 2.20
(1.65) 1.64
(1.46) 0.07
(0.76) 0.34
(0.92) 0.60
(1.05)
T5: Hexaconazole 5% SC 50 1000 6.34
(2.61) 8.07
(2.93) 8.54
(3.01) 9.24
(3.12) 12.67
(3.63) 12.8
(3.65) 13.14
(3.69) 13.47
(3.74)
T6: Tricyclazole 75% WP 225 300 5.67
(2.48) 7.34
(2.8) 8.40
(2.98) 9.57
(3.18) 12.67
(3.63) 13.00
(3.67) 12.94
(3.66) 13.34
(3.72)
T7: Untreated control - - 5.87
(2.52) 7.20
(2.78) 8.00
(2.92) 9.24
(3.12) 10.67
(3.34) 12.94
(3.67) 13.27
(3.71) 13.54
(3.75)
CD @ 5 % NS 0.28 0.24 0.16 0.35 0.27 0.27 0.26
Figures in parenthesis are square root transformed values. DAA- Days After First Application, DSA- Days After Second Application, NS- Non significant
c) Bio-efficacy of the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure against Sheath Blight
It is seen from Table-16 that at the time of initiation of trial, the disease was not observed and were uniform across the treatments. At 5 days after first application, the highest PDI was recorded in T7 Untreated Control (28.55%). The significant lowest PDI was observed in T2 (0.00%) which was at par with T1 & T3 (2.86 & 4.06% respectively) and significantly superior over rest of the treatments. Similar observations were recorded on 10 days after first application. But at 15 days after first application, lowest PDI was observed in T2 (12.84%) which was at par with T1 (12.84%) and significantly superior over rest of the treatments.
At 0 days after second application, the significant lowest PDI was also observed in T2 (13.35%) which was at par with T1 & T3 (18.62 & 18.77% respectively) and significantly superior over rest of the treatments. At 5 days after second application the lowest PDI was observed in T2 (9.23%) which was at par with T1 (10.98%) and significantly superior over rest of the treatments. On 10 days after second application, same trend of observations as of 0 day were observed. But at 15 days after second application T2 recorded the lowest PDI (21.98%) which was significantly superior over all the treatments followed by T1 (32.82%).So overall, T2 and T1 were found superior for controlling the Sheath Blight disease.
Table-16: Bio-efficacy of different treatments of tests products against Sheath Blight of Paddy
Treatment DOSE/ ha 1st Application 2nd Application
Mean PDI Mean PDI
g a.i. Formulation (g/ml) 0
DAFA 5
DAFA 10
DAFA 15
DAFA 0
DASA 5
DASA 10
DASA 15
DASA
T1: Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-3) 500+50+200 2000 0.00
(0.00) 0.75
(2.86) 2.97
(7.85) 5.19
(12.84) 10.38
(18.62) 3.71
(10.98) 7.41
(15.76) 29.63
(32.82)
T2: Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-4) 500+50+200 2000 0.00
(0.00) 0.00
(0.00) 2.23
(8.58) 5.19
(12.84) 5.56
(13.35) 2.60
(9.23) 6.30
(14.06) 14.08
(21.98)
T3: Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 1.25% + Tricyclazole 5.25% WP (Experiment-5) 500+25+105 2000 0.00
(0.00) 1.49
(4.06) 2.97
(8.12) 14.08
(21.65) 10.38
(18.77) 7.04
(15.32) 8.15
(16.33) 29.63
(32.96)
T4: Cartap hydrochloride 50% SP 500 1000 0.00
(0.00) 19.26
(25.94) 24.45
(29.54) 31.12
(33.85) 50.38
(45.22) 39.63
(39.01) 44.45
(41.81) 34.82
(36.16)
T5: Hexaconazole 5% SC 50 1000 0.00
(0.00) 7.41
(15.54) 17.04
(23.67) 20.75
(26.4) 22.97
(28.6) 9.63
(18.06) 18.52
(25.44) 31.12
(33.84)
T6: Tricyclazole 75% WP 225 300 0.00
(0.00) 14.08
(21.98) 31.86
(34.28) 44.45
(41.8) 42.23
(40.53) 34.82
(36.12) 37.04
(37.47) 31.86
(34.32)
T7: Untreated control - - 0.00
(0.00) 22.97
(28.55) 27.41
(31.36) 42.97
(40.92) 50.38
(45.2) 54.08
(47.34) 45.93
(42.61) 51.12
(45.64)
CD @ 5 % NS 6.74 11.18 9.48 5.77 3.59 6.89 6.05
Figures in parenthesis are arcsine transformed values. DAA- Days After First Application, DSA- Days After Second Application, NS- Non significant

d) Bio-efficacy of the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure against Leaf Blast
It is seen from Table-17 that, at the time of initiation of trial, Leaf Blast disease was not observed. At 5 days after first application, the highest PDI was recorded in T7 Untreated Control (29.57%). The significant lowest PDI was observed in T2 (0.00%) which was at par with T1 (0.00%) and significantly superior over rest of the treatments. Similar trend of observations was observed on 10 & 15 days after first application.
At the time of second application (0 days) similar trend as of first application was observed. Where T2 & T1 showed least PDI (11.19% & 13.11% respectively) which were at par with each other and significantly superior over rest of the treatments. At 5 days after second application lowest PDI was recorded in T2 (0.00%) which were at par with treatment T1 & T3 (12.86% both) and significantly superior over rest of the treatments. On 10 days after second application similar trend as of first application observed and at 15 days after second application similar results were recorded as of 0 days after second application. So for Leaf Blast also overall, T2 and T1 were found superior for controlling the disease.
Table-17: Bio-efficacy of different treatments of tests products against Leaf Blast of Paddy
Treatment (Leaf blast) DOSE/ ha 1st Application 2nd Application
Mean PDI Mean PDI
g a.i. Formulation (g/ml) 0
DAFA 5
DAFA 10
DAFA 15
DAFA 0
DASA 5
DASA 10
DASA 15
DASA
T1: Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP ( Experiment-3) 500+50+200 2000 0.00
(0.00) 0.0
(0.0) 2.23
(6.92) 3.71
(9.05) 4.45
(11.91) 0.75
(2.86) 1.49
(5.72) 30.38
(33.42)
T2: Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP ( Experiment-4) 500+50+200 2000 0.00
(0.00) 0.0
(0.0) 0.75
(2.86) 2.23
(6.92) 5.19
(13.11) 0.0
(0.0) 1.49
(5.72) 29.26
(32.65)
T3: Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 1.25% + Tricyclazole 5.25% WP ( Experiment-5) 500+25+105 2000 0.00
(0.00) 4.45
(11.91) 9.63
(17.91) 18.52
(25.37) 25.93
(30.58) 0.75
(2.86) 5.19
(13.11) 31.12
(33.88)
T4: Cartap hydrochloride 50% SP 500 1000 0.00
(0.00) 18.52
(25.44) 27.41
(31.43) 35.56
(36.52) 41.49
(40.06) 54.08
(47.35) 58.52
(49.95) 51.86
(46.08)
T5: Hexaconazole 5% SC 50 1000 0.00
(0.00) 11.86
(20.02) 22.97
(28.53) 37.78
(37.84) 46.67
(43.08) 42.97
(40.94) 45.93
(42.66) 41.49
(40.09)
T6: Tricyclazole 75% WP 225 300 0.00
(0.00) 2.97
(9.78) 5.19
(13.11) 7.41
(15.76) 8.89
(17.27) 10.0
(18.28) 16.3
(23.74) 40.08
(38.67)
T7: Untreated control - - 0.00
(0.00) 24.45
(29.57) 32.6
(34.71) 47.41
(43.51) 58.15
(55.69) 55.56
(48.2) 63.71
(52.99) 52.60
(46.49)
CD @ 5 % NS 4.27 7.48 9.01 6.44 5.69 6.77 5.98
Figures in parenthesis are arcsine transformed values. DAA- Days After First Application, DSA- Days After Second Application, NS- Non significant
c) Phytotoxicity
The pesticidal compositions of the present disclosure were sprayed to check the phytotoxic effects like leaf injury on tips/surface, vein clearing, necrosis, hyponasty and epinasty on the Paddy crop at X and 2X dosages along with Untreated Control. The observations on these phytotoxicity parameters were observed on before spray and at 3, 5, 7, 10 & 15 days after application and the results are summarized in Table-18.

Table-18: Phyto-toxicity effect of different treatments on Paddy
Tr. No. Treatment Details
Dose *Phytotoxicity
(Based on 0-10 Phytotoxicity Rating Scale)
g a.i./ha ml or g/ha Before Spray Days after application (DAA)
1 3 5 7 10 15
T1 Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-3) 500+50+200 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T2 Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-4) 500+50+200 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T3 Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 1.25% + Tricyclazole 5.25% WP (Experiment-5) 500+25+105 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T4 Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-3) 1000+100+400 4000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T5 Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-4) 1000+100+400 4000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T6 Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 1.25% + Tricyclazole 5.25% WP (Experiment-5) 1000+50+210 4000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T7 Untreated control - - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
*For phototoxic symptoms- Leaf injury on tips and Leaf surface, Wilting, Vein Clearing, Necrosis, Epinasty and Hyponasty

It is seen from Table-18 that there was no phytotoxicity observed on the crop after application of any of the treatment. There was no any adverse effect noticed on the crop in the field applied with these test products.
d) Effect of the pesticidal composition on Yield
Table-19: Effect of different treatments on Paddy Yield
Tr. No Treatment Details Dose (g a.i./ha) Dose (ml or g/ha) Yield (kg/ha)

T1 T1: Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-3) 500+50+200 2000 5621
T2 T2: Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-4) 500+50+200 2000 5736
T3 T3: Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 1.25% + Tricyclazole 5.25% WP (Experiment-5) 500+25+105 2000 5355
T4 T4: Cartap hydrochloride 50% SP 500 1000 5235
T5 T5: Hexaconazole 5% SC 50 1000 5258
T6 T6: Tricyclazole 75% WP 225 300 5235
T7 T7: Untreated control - - 4963
CD (P = 0.05) 183

It is seen from Table-19 that all the treatments significantly increase the yield than T7 Untreated Control (4963 Kg/ha). The highest yield was observed in treatment T2 (5736 Kg/ha), which was at par with T1 (5621 Kg/ha) and significantly superior over rest of the treatments.
It is clearly seen from the above studies that the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure is effective against insect pests and diseases of Paddy. It is observed that Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP
(Experiment-3) & Cartap hydrochloride 25% + Hexaconazole 2.5% + Tricyclazole 10% WP (Experiment-4) perform better than rest. The efficacy of the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure (Cartap Hydrochloride + Hexaconazole + Tricyclazole) is far better than commercially available pesticides, such as Cartap Hydrochloride 50% WP and Hexaconazole 5% SC & Tricyclazole 75% WP for controlling lepidopteran insect pests and disease complex of Paddy. . Further, there is no phytotoxicity effect of the insecticidal composition on Paddy. It is also observed that as the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure provided significantly improved bio-efficacy and hence is capable of producing higher Paddy yield. The pesticidal composition of the present disclosure exhibits synergistic effect in controlling the pests of paddy crop, and can be used effectively and safely used for the management of pests as compared to individual use of Cartap HCl, hexaconazole and tricyclazole alone.
TECHNICAL ADVANCEMENTS
The present disclosure described herein above has several technical advantages including, but not limited to, the realization of a stable, and ready to use pesticidal composition having enhanced efficacy.
The embodiments herein and the various features and advantageous details thereof are explained with reference to the non-limiting embodiments in the following description. Descriptions of well-known components and processing techniques are omitted so as to not unnecessarily obscure the embodiments herein. The examples used herein are intended merely to facilitate an understanding of ways in which the embodiments herein may be practiced and to further enable those of skill in the art to practice the embodiments herein. Accordingly, the examples should not be construed as limiting the scope of the embodiments herein.
The foregoing description of the specific embodiments so fully reveal the general nature of the embodiments herein that others can, by applying current knowledge, readily modify and/or adapt for various applications such specific embodiments without departing from the generic concept, and, therefore, such adaptations and modifications should and are intended to be comprehended within the meaning and range of equivalents of the disclosed embodiments. It is to be understood that the phraseology or terminology employed herein is for the purpose of description and not of limitation. Therefore, while the embodiments herein have been described in terms of preferred embodiments, those skilled in the art will recognize that the embodiments herein can be practiced with modification within the spirit and scope of the embodiments as described herein.
The use of the expression “at least” or “at least one” suggests the use of one or more elements or ingredients or quantities, as the use may be in the embodiment of the disclosure to achieve one or more of the desired objects or results.
Any discussion of documents, acts, materials, devices, articles or the like that has been included in this specification is solely for the purpose of providing a context for the disclosure. It is not to be taken as an admission that any or all of these matters form a part of the prior art base or were common general knowledge in the field relevant to the disclosure as it existed anywhere before the priority date of this application.
The numerical values mentioned for the various physical parameters, dimensions or quantities are only approximations and it is envisaged that the values higher/lower than the numerical values assigned to the parameters, dimensions or quantities fall within the scope of the disclosure, unless there is a statement in the specification specific to the contrary.
While considerable emphasis has been placed herein on the components and component parts of the preferred embodiments, it will be appreciated that many embodiments can be made and that many changes can be made in the preferred embodiments without departing from the principles of the disclosure. These and other changes in the preferred embodiment as well as other embodiments of the disclosure will be apparent to those skilled in the art from the disclosure herein, whereby it is to be distinctly understood that the foregoing descriptive matter is to be interpreted merely as illustrative of the disclosure and not as a limitation.
,CLAIMS:WE CLAIM:
1. A pesticidal composition comprising cartap hydrochloride, at least one conazole and tricyclazole.
2. The pesticidal composition as claimed in claim 1 comprising cartap hydrochloride in an amount of 0.1 wt% to 50 wt% of the composition.
3. The pesticidal composition as claimed in claim 1 comprising conazole in an amount of 0.1 wt% to 40 wt% of the composition.
4. The pesticidal composition as claimed in claim 1 comprising tricyclazole in an amount of 0.1 wt% to 40 wt% of the composition.
5. The pesticidal composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein said conazole is selected from the group consisting of hexaconazole, azaconazole, bromuconazole, cyproconazole, diclobutrazol, difenoconazole, diniconazole, diniconazole-M, epoxiconazole, etaconazole, fenbuconazole, fluquinconazole, flusilazole, flutriafol, furconazole, imibenconazole, ipconazole, metconazole, myclobutanil, penconazole, propiconazole, prothioconazole, quinconazole, simeconazole, tebuconazole, tetraconazole, triadimefon, triadimenol, triticonazole, and uniconazole.
6. The pesticidal composition as claimed in claim 5, wherein said conazole is selected from the group consisting of hexaconazole, cyproconazole, difenoconazole, epoxiconazole, ipconazole, metconazole, myclobutanil, penconazole, propiconazole, prothioconazole, tebuconazole, and tetraconazole.
7. The pesticidal composition as claimed in claim 1 comprising one or more agrochemically acceptable additives.
8. The composition as claimed in claim 7, wherein said additive is selected from the group consisting of at least one surfactant, at least one stabilizer, at least one filler, at least one coloring agent, at least one carrier, at least one acidifying agent, and combinations thereof.
9. The pesticidal composition as claimed in claim 1 comprising:
- cartap hydrochloride in an amount in the range of 0.1 wt% to 40 wt% of the composition;
- at least one conazole in an amount in the range of 0.1 wt% to 30 wt% of the composition;
- tricyclazole in an amount in the range of 0.1 % to 30 % weight of the composition; and
- one or more agrochemically acceptable additives.
10. The pesticidal composition as claimed in claim 1 comprising:
- cartap hydrochloride in an amount in the range of 0.1 wt% to 30 wt% of the total composition;
- at least one conazole in an amount in the range of 0.1 wt% to 15 wt% weight of the total composition;
- tricyclazole in an amount in the range of 0.1 wt% to 15 wt% weight of the total composition; and
- agrochemically acceptable additives selected from the group consisting of at least one surfactant, at least one stabilizer, at least one filler, at least one coloring agent, at least one acidifying agent, carrier and combinations thereof.
11. The pesticidal composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein said pesticidal composition is in at least one dosage form selected from the group consisting of encapsulated granules, water dispersible granules and wettable powder,.
12. A process for preparing a pesticidal composition as claimed in claim 1 in the form of encapsulated granules, the process comprising the following steps:
- blending pre-determined quantities of at least one surfactant, at least one stabilizer, at least one acidifying agent, and at least one coloring agent to obtain a blended mixture;
- heating said blended mixture at a temperature in the range of 55 °C to 65 °C and admixing with pre-determined quantity of a carrier to obtain an admixture;
- cooling said admixture to a temperature in the range of 10 °C to 40 °C, followed by addition of pre-determined quantity of a carrier and blending to obtain a blended admixture;
- milling pre-determined quantities of cartap, at least one conazole and tricyclazole to obtain wettable powder;
- blending said wettable powder with said blended admixture for a time period in the range of 40 minutes to 120 minutes to obtain coated granules; and
- blending said coated granules with a pre-determined amount of filler for a time period in the range of 20 minutes to 60 minutes to obtain said pesticidal composition in the form of encapsulated granules.
13. A process for preparing a pesticidal composition as claimed in claim 1 in the form of wettable powder, the process comprising the following steps:
- blending pre-determined amounts of a filler, and a surfactant to obtain a mixture;
- mixing pre-determined amounts of cartap hydrochloride, at least one conazole and tricyclazole to said blended mixture to obtain a resultant mixture;
- blending pre-determined amounts of a acidifying agent, a surfactant, and a stabilizer to said resultant mixture to obtain a blended mixture;
- milling said blended mixture for a time period in the range of 40 minutes to 120 minutes to obtain a milled mixture; and
- blending a pre-determined amount of a dispersing agent to said milled mixture to obtain said pesticidal composition in the form of wettable powder.
14. A method for controlling pests comprising contacting an infested site with a pesticidal composition comprising cartap hydrochloride, at least one conazole and tricyclazole by applying an effective amount of the composition thereon.
15. A kit configurable as a pesticidal composition adapted to be stored, transported, and discharged for treatment of plants, its habitat, soil, a crop or a crop field, comprising cartap hydrochloride, at least one conazole, tricyclazole and agrochemically acceptable additives.
16. Use of a pesticidal composition as claimed in claim 1, comprising cartap hydrochloride, at least oneconazole and tricyclazole for treatment of plants, its habitat, soil, a crop or a crop field.