DESC:Synergistic Fungicidal Combination of Thifluzamide and Thiophanate Methyl
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to a synergistic fungicidal composition comprising of succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) fungicide and thiophanate methyl in EC / WDG / SC / SL / OD / OS / Solid Granules and other formulations in different percentages. More precisely, the subject matter of the present invention is a synergistic fungicidal composition based on a combination of thifluzamide and thiophanate methyl optionally with at least one agriculturally acceptable excipient which will facilitate in the preparation of desired formulations. The present invention also relates to the process for the preparation of synergistic fungicidal composition thereof and use of this combination for combating plant pathogenic fungi in and on the seeds and plants at different growth stages for crop protection and good yields.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Crop protection is the practice of protecting the crop yields from pests, weeds, plant diseases, and other organisms that damage agricultural crops, which is critical from early stages of crop development. Preventing pests and diseases in the entire crop cycle, i.e., from root development to maturing crop, leads to increased crop quality and yield. The control of plant diseases caused by fungi is extremely important in achieving high crop efficiency. Plant diseases cause significant damage to vegetables, fields, cereal, fruit and other crops leading to reduction in productivity, yield and quality of the crops. Fungicides help to minimize this damage by controlling plant pathogenic fungi. The use of two or more appropriate active ingredient combinations in specific dose ratios leads to synergism in crop protection. In addition to this, often highly destructive plant diseases can be difficult to control and may develop resistance to commercial fungicides. Many products are commercially available for these purposes, but there is still a continues need to develop new fungicidal combinations which are more effective, less costly, less toxic, environmentally safer and have different sites of action.
The biggest challenge in the field of crop protection is to reduce the dosage rate of active ingredients to diminish or circumvent environmental or toxicological effects without compromising on effective crop protection against pathogenic fungi, in addition to long lasting and broad-spectrum protection from plant diseases. Another challenge is to reduce the excessive application of solo chemical compounds or fungicides which invariably helps in rapid selection of pathogenic fungi and aid in developing natural or adapted resistance against the active compound in question.
Therefore, it is indeed necessary to use the fungicidal combination in lower doses, fast acting with the different mode of action that can provide long lasting control against broad spectrum of pathogenic fungi and check the resistance development in fungi. The composition should have high synergistic action, no cross resistance to existing fungicides, avoid excess loading of the toxicant to the environment and negligible impact to environmental safety. Thus, there is a need for synergistic fungicidal combinations which could be physico-compatible formulations in the form of storage stability, safe packaging and ready to use formulations.
OBJECT OF THE INVENTION
The principal object of the present invention is to provide a fungicide mixture or combination which solves at least one of the major problems discussed above like reducing the dosage rate, broadening the spectrum of activity, or combining activity with prolonged pest control and resistance management with improved environmental safety by reducing toxicity and residue deposit in soil and in crops. Thus, the combination of the present invention is designed to target and eliminate a broader spectrum of pests, prevent the development of resistance, and potentially reduce the risk of negative environmental impacts associated with a single fungicide.
The details of one or more embodiments of this disclosure are set forth in the accompanying description below and other features, objects, and advantages will be apparent from the description and the claims.
DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
The present disclosure / specification refers to a synergistic fungicidal or pesticidal composition and the process for the preparation for crop protection.
The term “combination” can be replaced with the words “mixture” or “composition” defined or refers to as combining two or more active ingredients formulated in desired formulations.
The term “pesticide” as used in this specification refers to a substance or mixture of substances intended for preventing, destroying, repelling, or mitigating any pest or weeds which causes damage to the crop. Herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides are mainly used as pesticides which control weeds and insect pests and disease-causing pathogens respectively that eventually leads to high yield of crops.
The term “Fungicide” also called antimycotic, as used in this specification refers to a type of chemical compound or substance specifically designed to protect the crops and kill or inhibit the growth of fungi and their spores that cause economic damage to crops, ornamental plants or endanger the health of domestic animals or humans.
The term “synergism” as used in this specification refers to the interaction between two or more active compounds or other factors to produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects. The present invention involves the mixture of two active ingredients which has increased efficacy when compared to individual use and admixture of those components.
The conventional fungicides have poor activity, limited to certain fungi, and are not satisfactorily maintained for prolonged periods. Even though some fungicides may bear satisfactory fungicidal effects, as they require improvements in respect of environment and health safety and are also required to achieve a high fungicidal effect at a smaller dosage and lack of resistance management.
We found that this objective in part or complete can be achieved by the combination of active compounds defined at the outset. Thus, the present inventors have intensively studied to solve these problems and found that by combining fungicidal composition having thifluzamide and thiophanate methyl in different formulation and percentages have astonishing effects in controlling fungi and by reducing the amount of dosage than in a case of using an active compound alone.
Therefore, the present invention provides a novel synergistic fungicidal composition with thifluzamide and thiophanate methyl and purpose thereof. The synergy of this fungicidal composition having thifluzamide and thiophanate methyl, with dual mode of action (succinate dehydrogenase inhibition and tubulin polymerization inhibition) can generate efficient synergism and can enable broad spectrum satisfactory disease control from soil borne, seed borne and foliar plant diseases for prolonged period of time at lower dose, powered by preventive, curative and systemic activity, rain fastness, vapour activity and phytotonic effect.
This combination can be developed in the form of Emulsifiable Concentrates (EC), Dispersible Concentrates (DC), Oil Dispersions (OD), Suspension Concentrates (SC), Soluble Liquids (SL), Suspoemulsion (SE), Emulsion Concentrates (EW), Microemulsions, Wettable Powders (WP), Water-Dispersible Granules (WG), Soluble Powders (SP), Granules (G), Oil Solutions (OS), Aqueous Suspensions (AS), Aqueous Solutions (AS), Microencapsulated Suspensions (ME), and Microencapsulated Emulsions (MEC), mixed formulation of Suspension Concentrate and Capsule Suspension (ZC) and other conventional formulation and with different percentages and can be used for foliar applications or soil applications and seed treatment. This unique fungicide combination can also effectively check the resistance development in pathogen.
The present invention involves the mixture of two active ingredients which are classified under succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) fungicides and thiophanate methyl fungicide are described herein thereof.
Succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) fungicides have high activity and broad fungicidal spectrum, and they are outstanding candidates for coordination with other fungicides. The mechanism of SDHIs is to inhibit the activity of succinate dehydrogenase, thereby affecting mitochondrial respiration and ultimately killing pathogenic fungi. Thifluzamide is classified as a succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) fungicide.

Thifluzamide (IUPAC name: N-[2,6-dibromo-4-(trifluoromethoxy) phenyl]-2-methyl-4-(trifluoromethyl)-1,3-thiazole-5-carboximide; molecular formula: C13H6Br2F6N2O2S; molecular weight: 528.06 g/mol) is a systemic fungicide with the protective and curative action belongs to succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) fungicide, which inhibiting the respiration of fungi by binding to ubiquitin site of mitochondrial succinate ubiquinone reductase leading to death of fungi. It has good control effect on many fungal diseases (especially effective against diseases caused by basidiomycetes).
Thiophanate methyl (IUPAC name: methyl N-[[2-(methoxy carbonyl carbamo thioylamino) phenyl] carbamothioyl] carbamate; molecular formula: C12H14N4O4S2; molecular weight: 342.4 g/mol) is a unique combination of curative, preventive and systemic broad-spectrum fungicide belongs to a member of the class of thiourea, carbamate ester and benzimidazole precursor fungicide i.e., dimethyl ester of (1,2-phenylenedicarbamothioyl) biscarbamic acid. It disrupts the pathogen via, inhibition of tubulin polymerization which is vital for the cytoskeleton and motor protein formation in pathogen.

Thiophanate methyl fungicide is effective against broad spectrum of fungi that causes diseases includes anthracnose, eyespot, scab, rot, leaf spot, powdery mildew, rusts, brown spot, grey mold and many other diseases in fruit, vegetables, cereals, flowers, turf and other crops used for both seed treatment & foliar application. It bears enhanced phytotonic effect on plants with lower mammalian toxicity.
The synergistic fungicidal composition of the present invention controls different groups of fungi selected from ascomycota, deuteromycota, basidiomycota and oomycota on a wide variety of crops.
The synergistic fungicidal composition of the present invention is also used in seed treatment to protect against diseases which impair good seed germination and seedling development.
The synergistic fungicidal composition of the present invention controls many diseases in plants which include leaf spot, blight, dollar spot, rusts, scab, powdery mildew, downy mildew, net blotch, blight, summer patch, brown patch, stem canker, damping-off and rot.
The first embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic fungicidal composition comprising:
at least one succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) fungicide and
thiophanate-methyl.
First aspect of the first embodiment, the succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) fungicide is selected from but not limited to the group comprising benodanil, benzovindiflupyr, bixafen, boscalid, carboxin, fenfuram, fluindapyr, fluopyram, flutolanil, fluxapyroxad, furametpyr, inpyrfluxam, isofetamid, isoflucypram, isopyrazam, mepronil, oxycarboxin, penflufen, penthiopyrad, pydiflumetofen, sedaxane and thifluzamide; preferably thifluzamide.
Second aspect of the first embodiment, the succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) fungicide and thiophanate methyl are present in the weight ratio of (1-80): (1-80); preferably in the ratio of (1-20): (1-80).
The second embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic fungicidal composition comprising:
at least one succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) fungicide;
thiophanate-methyl; and
at least one agriculturally acceptable excipient.
First aspect of the second embodiment, the succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) fungicide is selected from but not limited to the group comprising benodanil, benzovindiflupyr, bixafen, boscalid, carboxin, fenfuram, fluindapyr, fluopyram, flutolanil, fluxapyroxad, furametpyr, inpyrfluxam, isofetamid, isoflucypram, isopyrazam, mepronil, oxycarboxin, penflufen, penthiopyrad, pydiflumetofen, sedaxane and thifluzamide; preferably thifluzamide.
Second aspect of the second embodiment, the succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) fungicide and thiophanate methyl are present in the weight ratio of (1-80): (1-80); preferably in the ratio of (1-20): (1-80).
Third aspect of the second embodiment, agriculturally acceptable excipient selected from but not limited to the group comprising liquid medium, surfactant, stabilizer, anti-freezing agent, antifoaming agent, anticaking agent, dispersing agent, adjuvant and antibacterial agent. These are selected according to the respective types of formulation requirements and which will facilitate in the preparation different formulations.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, liquid medium acts as a carrier for the active ingredients and provides a stable environment for suspension selected form but not limited to water and organic solvents; preferably water.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, surfactant includes wetting agent and emulsifier.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, wetting agent is selected from but not limited to block copolymers.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, the block copolymers selected from the but not limited to styrene-butadiene block copolymer (SBS), butyl based block copolymer, poly(ethylene oxide)-poly(propylene oxide)-poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO-PPO-PEO), polystyrene-poly(ethylene oxide) (PS-PEO), poly(butadiene)-poly(styrene) (PB-PS), poly(methyl methacrylate)-poly(butadiene)-poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA-PB-PMMA), poly(caprolactone)-poly(ethylene glycol) (PCL-PEG) and poly(ethylene glycol)-poly(propylene glycol)-poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG-PPG-PEG); preferably butyl based block copolymer.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, stabilizer includes antioxidant, chelating agent, pH adjusters, UV absorber, stabilizing polymers and inert filler.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, anti-freezing agent selected from but not limited to ethylene glycol, propylene glycol, glycerol, calcium chloride, sodium acetate, potassium acetate and urea; preferably propylene glycol.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, antifoaming agents selected from but not limited to silicone-based antifoams, polyethylene glycol-based antifoams, mineral oil-based antifoams, ethylene glycol-based antifoams, polysorbate-based antifoams, dimethicone-based antifoams, polypropylene glycol-based antifoams, vegetable oil-based antifoams, alkyl siloxane-based antifoams and fatty acid-based antifoams; preferably alkyl siloxane-based antifoams; more preferably siloxane polyalkyleneoxide.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, dispersing agents selected from but not limited to polyethylene glycol, polysorbate, poly acrylate, poly(methyl methacrylate), polyvinyl alcohol, poly ethoxylated alcohol, poly ethoxylated fatty acids, polyacrylic acid, polyvinylpyrrolidone, alkyl sulfonates, aryl sulfonates, sodium tripolyphosphate, sodium dodecyl sulfate, sodium lignosulfonate, sodium carboxymethyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl methylcellulose, sorbitan esters (e.g., sorbitan monolaurate, sorbitan monooleate), gum arabic and carbomer and/or their comb polymers; preferably poly(methyl methacrylate) and polyethylene glycol comb polymer.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, adjuvant includes but not limited to spreader, sticker, penetrant, drift control agent, preservative, buffering agent, thickener, compatibility agent, binder and safener.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, thickener selected from but not limited to polysaccharides / carboxymethyl cellulose / bentonite clay, hydroxy propyl cellulose montmorillonite, bentonite, magnesium aluminium silicate and attapulgite; preferably water-soluble polysaccharides.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, antibacterial agent selected from but not limited to triclosan, triclocarban, clotrimazole, miconazole, copper-based compounds, chlorothalonil, benzisothiazolin-3-one (BIT), 5-chloro-2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one, 2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one (MIT), octylisothiazolinone (OIT) and dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid sodium salt (DBSA); preferably benzisothiazolin-3-one (BIT).
The third embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic fungicidal composition comprising:
thifluzamide;
thiophanate methyl;
liquid medium;
wetting agent;
antifreezing agent;
antifoaming agent;
dispersing agent;
adjuvant; and
antibacterial agent.
First aspect of the third embodiment, synergistic fungicidal composition comprising a combination of thifluzamide and thiophanate methyl; wherein thifluzamide and thiophanate methyl are present in the weight ratio of (1-80): (1-80); preferably in the ratio of (1-20): (1-80).
Second aspect of the third embodiment, agriculturally acceptable excipient selected from but not limited to the group comprising liquid medium, wetting agent, anti-freezing agent, antifoaming agent, dispersing agent, adjuvant and antibacterial agent. These are selected according to the respective types of formulation requirements and which will facilitate in the preparation different formulations.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, liquid medium acts as a carrier for the active ingredients and provides a stable environment for suspension selected form but not limited to water and organic solvents; preferably water.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, wetting agent is selected from but not limited to block copolymers.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, the block copolymers selected from the but not limited to styrene-butadiene block copolymer (SBS), butyl based block copolymer, poly(ethylene oxide)-poly(propylene oxide)-poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO-PPO-PEO), polystyrene-poly(ethylene oxide) (PS-PEO), poly(butadiene)-poly(styrene) (PB-PS), poly(methyl methacrylate)-poly(butadiene)-poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA-PB-PMMA), poly(caprolactone)-poly(ethylene glycol) (PCL-PEG) and poly(ethylene glycol)-poly(propylene glycol)-poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG-PPG-PEG); preferably butyl based block copolymer.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, anti-freezing agent selected from but not limited to ethylene glycol, propylene glycol, glycerol, calcium chloride, sodium acetate, potassium acetate and urea; preferably propylene glycol.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, antifoaming agents selected from but not limited to silicone-based antifoams, polyethylene glycol-based antifoams, mineral oil-based antifoams, ethylene glycol-based antifoams, polysorbate-based antifoams, dimethicone-based antifoams, polypropylene glycol-based antifoams, vegetable oil-based antifoams, alkyl siloxane-based antifoams and fatty acid-based antifoams; preferably alkyl siloxane-based antifoams; more preferably siloxane polyalkyleneoxide.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, dispersing agents selected from but not limited to polyethylene glycol, polysorbate, poly acrylate, poly(methyl methacrylate), polyvinyl alcohol, poly ethoxylated alcohol, poly ethoxylated fatty acids, polyacrylic acid, polyvinylpyrrolidone, alkyl sulfonates, aryl sulfonates, sodium tripolyphosphate, sodium dodecyl sulfate, sodium lignosulfonate, sodium carboxymethyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl methylcellulose, sorbitan esters (e.g., sorbitan monolaurate, sorbitan monooleate), gum arabic and carbomer and/or their comb polymers; preferably poly(methyl methacrylate) and polyethylene glycol comb polymer.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, adjuvant includes but not limited to spreader, sticker, penetrant, drift control agent, preservative, buffering agent, thickener, compatibility agent, binders and safener.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, thickener selected from but not limited to polysaccharides/carboxymethyl cellulose/bentonite clay, hydroxy propyl cellulose montmorillonite, bentonite, magnesium aluminium silicate and attapulgite; preferably water-soluble polysaccharides.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, antibacterial agent selected from but not limited to triclosan, triclocarban, clotrimazole, miconazole, copper-based compounds, chlorothalonil, benzisothiazolin-3-one (BIT), 5-chloro-2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one, 2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one (MIT), octylisothiazolinone (OIT) and dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid sodium salt (DBSA); preferably benzisothiazolin-3-one (BIT).
The fourth embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic fungicidal composition comprising:
thifluzamide and
thiophanate methyl.
First aspect of the fourth embodiment, synergistic fungicidal composition comprising a combination of thifluzamide and thiophanate methyl; wherein thifluzamide and thiophanate methyl are present in the weight ratio of (1-80): (1-80); preferably in the ratio of (1-20): (1-80).
Further aspect of the fourth embodiment, the composition of fourth embodiment comprising at least one agriculturally acceptable excipient there of which is / are used in preparation desired formulation.
The further aspect of the fourth embodiment, the composition of fourth embodiment is formulated as suspension concentrates (SC).
The fifth embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic fungicidal composition comprising:
thifluzamide;
thiophanate methyl;
water;
butyl based block copolymer;
propylene glycol;
siloxane polyalkyleneoxide;
comb polymer;
polysaccharides; and
benzisothiazolin-3-one.
First aspect of the fifth embodiment, synergistic fungicidal composition comprising a combination of thifluzamide and thiophanate methyl; wherein thifluzamide and thiophanate methyl are present in the weight ratio of (1-80): (1-80); preferably in the ratio of (1-20): (1-80).
The further aspect of the fifth embodiment, the composition of fifth embodiment is formulated as suspension concentrates (SC).
Another embodiment of the present invention provides a process for the preparation of a fungicidal formulation comprising:
add water into premix vessel,
add wetting agent, anti-freezing, dispersing agent, anti-bacterial agent and antifoaming agent to the above vessel under continuous stirring.
add thifluzamide and thiophanate methyl to the above mixture and stirred for 30-60 minutes to get homogenous mixture.
after mixing the above material, optionally mill or grind to get the desired particle size of minimum 99% by passing through 500 bss by wet sieving method and remove any oversized particles or agglomerate.
the obtained wet milled slurry particles with size d50 <5 micron material, then transfer into the blender and add thickener 2% gum solution to get desired viscosity.
mix well until a homogenous mixture is obtained, pack the formulation and seal it.
Another embodiment of the present invention, the fungicidal composition of the present invention used to control fungal diseases in several crops specifically selected from rice, wheat, fruits, roots, tubers, vegetables, maize, grains, sugarcane, cereals and field crops and for various other pest control requirements.
Another embodiment of the present invention, the fungicidal composition further comprises at least another agrochemical selected from a fungicide, insecticide, herbicide, biocide, nutrient, plant growth regulator, plant activator, fertilizers and likewise.
Another embodiment of the present invention, the fungicidal composition of the present invention shows synergistic effects of better pest control with minimum fungal resistance and improved crop yield and quality.
Another embodiment of the present invention, the synergistic fungicidal composition is applied at different stages of crops for preventive, curative, systemic activity by conventional spraying methods, such as foliar applications or soil applications over the target areas of crops at same time avoiding excessive drift or runoff of the composition securing thorough coverage.
Another embodiment of the present invention, synergistic fungicidal combination decreases natural hazardous effect of single active ingredient and also minimizes the residue deposition in environment.
Advantages of the Present Invention:
The synergistic fungicidal composition of present invention is specifically designed to control fungal diseases in plants by targeting and eliminating the fungal pathogens with dual mode of action of succinate dehydrogenase inhibition and tubulin polymerization inhibition there by enhance crop health and improve overall yields compare to single component of composition, market standards and admixture of those components.
The novel, innovative and synergistic fungicidal composition of present invention making them versatile and adaptable to different application methods and crops for various agricultural practices.
The synergistic fungicidal composition of the present invention has quick action on disease control after application. This quick action will help to prevent further disease spread and reduce crop damage.
Higher efficacy against broader spectrum of fungicides with different modes of action can be used in rotation or as part of an integrated pest management (IPM) strategy to reduce the risk of developing resistant fungal diseases.
The synergistic fungicidal composition of present invention can also be used in seed treatment which protects harvested crops during storage and transportation, preventing post-harvest diseases and ensuring the quality and marketability of the product.
The synergistic fungicidal composition of present invention minimizes the potential negative effects on the environment and non-target organisms. And which is absorbed by the plant system within two hours of the spray and it cannot be washed away by the post application rains.
The best mode of carrying present invention is described in the below given examples. These examples are merely for illustrative purpose only, not to determine the scope of the invention and in no way limit the scope or spirit of the present invention.
EXAMPLES:
EXAMPLE 1: SUSPENSION CONCENTRATE (SC) FORMULATION OF SYNERGISTIC FUNGICIDAL COMPOSITION OF THE PRESENT INVENTION:
TABLE 1:
S. No Ingredient Weight / Weight %
1 Thifluzamide 10
2 Thiophanate methyl 65
3 Butyl based block copolymer 2.5
4 Propylene Glycol 5
5 Siloxane polyalkyleneoxide 0.5
6 Comb polymer 2.5
7 Polysaccharides 0.3
8 Benzisothiazolin-3-one 0.1
9 Water QS
Total 100

EXAMPLE 2: PROCESS FOR PREPARATION OF SUSPENSION CONCENTRATE (SC) FORMULATION OF SYNERGISTIC FUNGICIDAL COMPOSITION OF THE PRESENT INVENTION
Add water, wetting agent, anti-freezing, dispersing agent, anti-bacterial agent and antifoaming agent into the pre blender in the above-mentioned ratios and mix well until a homogenous mixture is obtained. Add thifluzamide and thiophanate methyl in the above-mentioned ratios into the above mixture and mix well. Optionally mill or grind to get the desired particle size. Then add thickener to the above obtained material mixed well until to get the homogenous mixture with desired viscosity.
EXAMPLE 3: BIOEFFICACY AND PHYTOTOXICITY TESTS OF THE PRESENT INVENTION
Presently to evaluate the efficacy of thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC against different fungal pathogens on different crops and to test their phytotoxicity on the crop after the sprayings have been conducted. Early blight in tomato, tikka leafspot in groundnut and sheath blight in paddy are taken into the evaluation. Along with thifluzamide + thiophanate methyl SC as a combination formulation both the fungicides are tested individually, and with the market standards. The tests are conducted at three dose levels viz., low, medium, and high along with the sole molecule as individual treatments and their efficiency comparison is done with the current competitive market standards. The active ingredients are tested at three different formulation strengths i.e., thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC (@900ml/ha), thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC (@750ml/ha) and thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC (@600ml/ha). To justify the results, the overall effect and other parameters are calculated over untreated check and to see their effect on crop, its yield is recorded. The crops are first divided into plots for each treatment and replicated three times following randomized block design. The spraying method followed was foliar application with the help of a knapsack sprayer and three sprays are with an interval of 10 days.
Method of Observations:
Disease observations: select 5 random plants in the plot and the disease symptoms are scored based on disease rating scale and then percent disease index will be calculated.
The observations were taken at 1 day before spraying and at 10 days after spraying.
Take the observation on the crop safety of the fungicide i.e., phytotoxicity / softener observation of fungicide after application at 5 and 10 Days after application.
Parameters of Observations:
The disease severity is measured by an index, measured as Percent disease index (PDI) will be calculated by using following formula: –
PDI = (Sum of all disease ratings)/(Total no.of leaves x Maximum disease grade) x 100
The percent reduction is calculated by the following formula: –
% Reduction = ( PDI in control plot-PDI in treated plot )/(PDI in control plot)× 100
The effect of these fungicides in combination and alone when applied on crops is assessed based on the yield (quintal per hectare). This parameter defines the crop quality.
Results:
The fungicide combination of thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC is effective against wide range of diseases, so the different diseases controlled in different crops in the field experiments were enlisted below,
Tomato – Early blight (Alternaria solani)
Groundnut – Tikka leafspot (Cercospora personata)
Paddy – Sheath blight (Rhizoctonia solani)
Example – 3.1: Tomato – Early blight
Table 1. Efficacy of spray application of thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC formulation against early blight in tomato.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Percent disease index
(PDI) after every spray % Reduction in PDI
Pre 1 2 3 AVG 1 2 3 AVG
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 600 13.2 4.2 5 10 8.10 81.17 83.82 80.51 81.83
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 750 12.8 2.8 4.8 9.4 7.45 87.44 84.47 81.68 84.53
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 900 12.3 1.7 2.4 4.6 5.25 92.38 92.23 91.03 91.88
Thifluzamide 24% SC 375 13 5 7 9 8.50 77.58 77.35 82.46 79.13
Thiophanate methyl 41.7% SC 1000 13.4 7 10 11 10.35 68.61 67.64 78.56 71.60
Carbendazim 12% + mancozeb 63% WP 750 12.9 9.4 12.6 14.2 12.28 57.85 59.22 72.32 63.13
Captan 70% + hexaconazole 5% WP 1000 12.4 9.6 10 15 11.75 56.95 67.64 70.76 65.12
Untreated -- 13.3 22.3 30.9 51.3 29.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
The data presented in Table. 1 showed the effect of different fungicidal treatments in combination, alone and the effect of market standards on disease severity of early blight disease in tomato crop. The percent reduction in disease incidence was also explained through the data represented in above table with treatments compared over control. In general, all treatments, at each rate of applications after three consecutive sprayings significantly reduced the disease severity comparing with the untreated control. The combination fungicidal treatments were more effective than sole molecules and market standards. The disease severity is measured as percent disease index (PDI), this varied between 12.3 to 13.4 among all the treatments before spraying (pre-treatment/pre-spray). The disease severity was measured 10 days after spraying and the spraying was done thrice in the crop. Among the tested fungicidal treatments, thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 900 ml/ha and thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 750 ml/ha were the most effective treatments. The PDI recorded in thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 900 ml/ha was 12.3 before spray and reduced to 1.7, 2.4, 4.6 after 1st, 2nd and 3rd spraying. The second-best treatment was thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 750 ml/ha where the PDI recorded was recorded as 12.8 before spraying and came down to 2.8 after 1st spray and recorded as 4.8, 9.4 after 2nd and 3rd spray. The lowest dose of thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 600 ml/ha with 13.2 as pre-treatment PDI, followed by 4.2 after end of first spray and reduced to 5 after 2nd and 10 after 3rd spray. While the market standards did not show much reduction in PDI. When calculated as percent disease reduction over control regarding the examined rates of fungicidal combination and as expected, recommended rates reduced the disease severity compared with fungicides applied alone and with market standards too. The percent reduction recorded were 91.88% (thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 900 ml/ha), 84.53% (thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 750 ml/ha) and 81.83% (thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 600 ml/ha), respectively, and the market standards recorded a percent reduction of 63.13% (carbendazim 12% + mancozeb 63% WP @ 750 g/ha), 65.12% (captan 70% + hexaconazole 5% WP @ 1000 g/ha) which was lower than the combination treatments.
Table 2. Effect of thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC formulation on yield of tomato.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Yield (q/ha)
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 600 37
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 750 39.6
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 900 41.8
Thifluzamide 24% SC 375 34.4
Thiophanate methyl 41.7% SC 1000 32.1
Carbendazim 12% + mancozeb 63% WP 750 29.8
Captan 70% + hexaconazole 5% WP 1000 26
Untreated -- 19.3
The yield of tomato recorded in different treatments as shown in the table above (Table 2.) implies that the combination molecule at the three doses positively affected the yield of the crop and the quality of pods was also superior. The highest yield was recorded in thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 900 ml/ha with 41.8 q/ha, followed by thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 750 ml/ha with 39.6 q/ha and thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 600 ml/ha with 37 q/ha. While the individual molecules and market standards recorded yields ranging between 26-34.4 q/ha were inferior to the yield recorded in the combination molecule treatments.
Table 3. Phytotoxicity of thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC formulation on tomato
Treatments Days Visual Rating Scale
Yellowing Necrosis Wilting Vein
Clearing Leaf tip / Margin Dying Stunting / Dwarfing
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@600ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@750ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@900ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Thifluzamide 24% SC @ 375ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Thiophanate methyl 41.7% SC @ 1000 ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Carbendazim 12% + mancozeb 63% WP @ 750g/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Captan 70% + hexaconazole 5% WP @ 1000g/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Untreated 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
The phytotoxicity effect of the fungicide combination i.e., thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC on tomato crop was tested after 5 and 10 Days after spraying. The crop was checked for symptoms like yellowing, necrosis, wilting, vein clearing, leaf tip or leaf margin dying and stunting or dwarfing of plants. After thorough observations, it could be concluded that the crop did not show any symptoms of phytotoxicity. Therefore, the present fungicide combination can be considered a safe molecule.
Example – 3.2: Groundnut – Tikka leafspot
Table 4. Efficacy of spray application of thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC formulation against tikka leafspot in groundnut.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Percent disease index
(PDI) after every spray % Reduction in PDI
Pre 1 2 3 AVG 1 2 3 AVG
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 600 18.7 4.2 5 7.2 8.78 82.35 81.55 76.62 80.18
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 750 18.4 3.6 4 6 8.00 84.87 85.24 80.52 83.54
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 900 19 1.2 2 3.2 6.35 94.96 92.62 89.61 92.40
Thifluzamide 24% SC 375 18.8 8.4 7.5 8.3 10.75 64.71 72.32 73.05 70.03
Thiophanate methyl 41.7% SC 1000 18.6 10.2 9.3 9.5 11.90 57.14 65.68 69.16 63.99
Carbendazim 12% + mancozeb 63% WP 500 18.3 8.2 9.2 10 11.43 65.55 66.05 67.53 66.38
Captan 70% + hexaconazole 5% WP 1000 18.3 9 11 11 12.33 62.18 59.41 64.29 61.96
Untreated -- 18.8 23.8 27.1 30.8 25.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
The data presented in Table. 4 showed the effect of different fungicidal treatments in combination, alone and the effect of market standards on disease severity of tikka leafspot disease in groundnut crop. The percent reduction in disease incidence was also explained through the data represented in above table with treatments compared over control. In general, all treatments, at each rate of applications after three consecutive sprayings significantly reduced the disease severity comparing with the untreated control. The combination fungicidal treatments were more effective than sole molecules and market standards. The disease severity is measured as percent disease index (PDI), this varied between 18.3 to 19 among all the treatments before spraying (pre-treatment/pre-spray). The disease severity was measured 10 days after spraying and the spraying was done thrice in the crop. Among the tested fungicidal treatments, thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC @ 900 ml/ha and thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC @ 750 ml/ha were the most effective treatments. The PDI recorded in thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC @ 900 ml/ha was 19 before spray and reduced to 1.2, 2, 3.2 after 1st, 2nd and 3rd spraying. The second-best treatment was thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC @ 750 ml/ha where the PDI recorded was recorded as 18.4 before spraying and came down to 3.6 after 1st spray and recorded as 4, 6 after 2nd and 3rd spray. The lowest dose of thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC @ 600 ml/ha with 18.7 as pre-treatment PDI, followed by 4.2 after end of first spray and reduced to 5 after 2nd and 7.2 after 3rd spray. While the market standards did not show much reduction in PDI. When calculated as percent disease reduction over control regarding the examined rates of fungicidal combination and as expected, recommended rates reduced the disease severity compared with fungicides applied alone and with market standards too. The percent reduction recorded were 92.40% (thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC @ 900 ml/ha), 83.54% (thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC @ 750 ml/ha) and 80.18% (thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC @ 600 ml/ha), respectively, and the market standards recorded a percent reduction of 66.38% (carbendazim 12% + mancozeb 63% WP @ 500 g/ha) 61.96% (captan 70% + hexaconazole 5% WP @ 1000 g/ha) which was lower than the combination treatments.
Table 5. Effect of thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC formulation on yield of groundnut.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Yield (kg/vine)
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 600 18
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 750 20.6
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 900 22.4
Thifluzamide 24% SC 375 16.6
Thiophanate methyl 41.7% SC 1000 15
Carbendazim 12% + mancozeb 63% WP 500 13
Captan 70% + hexaconazole 5% WP 1000 12
Untreated -- 10
The yield of groundnut recorded in different treatments as shown in the table above (Table 5.) implies that the combination molecule at the three doses positively affected the yield of the crop and the quality of pods was also superior. The highest yield was recorded in thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC @ 900 ml/ha with 22.4 q/ha, followed by thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC @ 750 ml/ha with 20.6 q/ha and thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC @ 600 ml/ha with 18 q/ha. While the individual molecules and market standards recorded yields ranging between 12-16.6 q/ha were inferior to the yield recorded in the combination molecule treatments.

Table 6. Phytotoxicity of thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC formulation on groundnut
Treatments Days Visual Rating Scale
Yellowing Necrosis Wilting Vein
Clearing Leaf tip / Margin Dying Stunting / Dwarfing
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC @600ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC @750ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC @900ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Thifluzamide 24% SC @ 375ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Thiophanate methyl 41.7% SC @ 1000ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Carbendazim 12% + mancozeb 63% WP @ 500g/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Captan 70% + hexaconazole 5% WP @ 1000g/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Untreated 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
The phytotoxicity effect of the fungicide combination i.e., thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC on groundnut was tested after 5 and 10 Days after spraying. The crop was checked for symptoms like yellowing, necrosis, wilting, vein clearing, leaf tip or leaf margin dying and stunting or dwarfing of plants. After thorough observations, it could be concluded that the crop did not show any symptoms of phytotoxicity. Therefore, the present fungicide combination can be considered a safe molecule.
Example – 3.3: Paddy-Sheath Blight
Table 7. Efficacy of spray application of thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC formulation against sheath blight in paddy (vertical spread).
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Percent disease index
(PDI) after every spray % Reduction in PDI
Pre 1 2 3 AVG 1 2 3 AVG
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 600 10.2 4 7 9 7.55 82.22 80.11 81.29 81.21
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 750 10.2 2.4 5 8 6.40 89.33 85.80 83.37 86.17
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 900 9.3 1.7 2.3 4 4.33 92.44 93.47 91.68 92.53
Thifluzamide 24% SC 375 9.3 9 9.6 8.6 9.13 60.00 72.73 82.12 71.62
Thiophanate methyl 41.7% SC 1000 11.4 9 10 13 10.85 60.00 71.59 72.97 68.19
Hexaconazole 5% + validamycin 2.5% SC 1000 10.2 12 13 14 12.30 46.67 63.07 70.89 60.21
Propiconazole 10.7% + tricyclazole 34.2% SC 700 9.6 11.1 11.1 10.8 10.65 50.67 68.47 77.55 65.56
Untreated -- 10.5 22.5 35.2 48.1 29.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
The data presented in Table. 7 showed the effect of different fungicidal treatments in combination, alone and the effect of market standards on disease severity of horizontal spread of sheath blight disease in paddy. The percent reduction in disease incidence was also explained through the data represented in above table with treatments compared over control. In general, all treatments, at each rate of applications after three consecutive sprayings significantly reduced the disease severity comparing with the untreated control. The combination fungicidal treatments were more effective than sole molecules and market standards. The disease severity is measured as percent disease index (PDI), this varied between 9.3 to 11.4 among all the treatments before spraying (pre-treatment/pre-spray). The disease severity was measured 10 days after spraying and the spraying was done thrice in the crop. Among the tested fungicidal treatments, thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 900 ml/ha and thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 750 ml/ha were the most effective treatments. The PDI recorded in thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 900 ml/ha was 9.3 before spray and reduced to 1.7, 2.3, 4 after 1st, 2nd and 3rd spraying. The second-best treatment was thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 750 ml/ha where the PDI recorded was recorded as 10.2 before spraying and came down to 2.4 after 1st spray and recorded as 5, 8 after 2nd and 3rd spray. The lowest dose of thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 600 ml/ha with 10.2 as pre-treatment PDI, followed by 4 after end of first spray and reduced to 7 after 2nd and 9 after 3rd spray. While the market standards did not show much reduction in PDI. When calculated as percent disease reduction over control regarding the examined rates of fungicidal combination and as expected, recommended rates reduced the disease severity compared with fungicides applied alone and with market standards too. The percent reduction recorded were 92.53% (thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 900 ml/ha), 86.17% (thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 750 ml/ha) and 81.21% (thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 600 ml/ha), respectively, and the market standards recorded a percent reduction of 60.21% (propiconazole 10.7% + tricyclazole 34.2% SC @ 700 ml/ha) and 65.56% (hexaconazole 5% + validamycin2.5% SC @ 1000 ml/ha) which was lower than the combination treatments.

Table 8. Efficacy of spray application of thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC formulation against sheath blight in paddy (horizontal spread).
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Percent disease index
(PDI) after every spray % Reduction in PDI
Pre 1 2 3 AVG 1 2 3 AVG
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 600 10.4 3 5 5.6 6.00 81.93 75.73 79.10 78.92
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 750 9.3 2 3.4 4.8 4.88 87.95 83.50 82.09 84.51
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 900 9.2 1 2 3.4 3.90 93.98 90.29 87.31 90.53
Thifluzamide 24% SC 375 9 4 6 8 6.75 75.90 70.87 70.15 72.31
Thiophanate methyl 41.7% SC 1000 9.5 6 7 10 8.13 63.86 66.02 62.69 64.19
Propiconazole 10.7% + tricyclazole 34.2% SC 700 8.9 6 9 10 8.48 63.86 56.31 62.69 60.95
Hexaconazole 5% + validamycin2.5% SC 1000 10.3 7 7.6 10 8.73 57.83 63.11 62.69 61.21
Untreated -- 10.6 16.6 20.6 26.8 18.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
The data presented in Table. 8 showed the effect of different fungicidal treatments in combination, alone and the effect of market standards on disease severity of horizontal spread of sheath blight disease in paddy. The percent reduction in disease incidence was also explained through the data represented in above table with treatments compared over control. In general, all treatments, at each rate of applications after three consecutive sprayings significantly reduced the disease severity comparing with the untreated control. The combination fungicidal treatments were more effective than sole molecules and market standards. The disease severity is measured as percent disease index (PDI), this varied between 8.9 to 10.4 among all the treatments before spraying (pre-treatment/pre-spray). The disease severity was measured 10 days after spraying and the spraying was done thrice in the crop. Among the tested fungicidal treatments, thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 900 ml/ha and thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 750 ml/ha were the most effective treatments. The PDI recorded in thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 900 ml/ha was 9.2 before spray and reduced to 1, 2, 3.4 after 1st, 2nd and 3rd spraying. The second-best treatment was thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 750 ml/ha where the PDI recorded was recorded as 9.3 before spraying and came down to 2 after 1st spray and recorded as 3.4, 8 after 2nd and 3rd spray. The lowest dose of thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 600 ml/ha with 10.4 as pre-treatment PDI, followed by 3 after end of first spray and reduced to 5 after 2nd and 5.6 after 3rd spray. While the market standards did not show much reduction in PDI. When calculated as percent disease reduction over control regarding the examined rates of fungicidal combination and as expected, recommended rates reduced the disease severity compared with fungicides applied alone and with market standards too. The percent reduction recorded were 90.53% (thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 900 ml/ha), 84.51% (thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 750 ml/ha) and 78.92% (thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 600 ml/ha), respectively, and the market standards recorded a percent reduction of 60.95% (propiconazole 10.7% + tricyclazole 34.2% SC @ 700 ml/ha) and 61.21% (hexaconazole 5% + validamycin 2.5% @ 1000 ml/ha) which was lower than the combination treatments.
Table 9. Effect of thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC formulation on yield in paddy.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Yield (q/ha)
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 600 45.3
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 750 48.5
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC 900 51.4
Thifluzamide 24% SC 375 41.6
Thiophanate methyl 41.7% SC 1000 40.2
Propiconazole 10.7% + tricyclazole 34.2% SC 700 38
Hexaconazole 5% + validamycin2.5% SC 1000 33
Untreated -- 29
The yield of paddy recorded in different treatments as shown in the table above (Table 6.) implies that the combination molecule at the three doses positively affected the yield of the crop. The highest yield was recorded in thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 900 ml/ha with 51.4 q/ha, followed by thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 750 ml/ha with 48.5 q/ha and thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@ 600 ml/ha with 45.3 q/ha. While the individual molecules and market standards recorded yields ranging between 33-41.6 q/ha which were inferior to the yield recorded in the combination molecule treatments

Table 10. Phytotoxicity of thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC formulation on paddy
Treatments Days Visual Rating Scale
Yellowing Necrosis Wilting Vein
Clearing Leaf tip / Margin Dying Stunting / Dwarfing
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@600ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC@750ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC @ 900ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Thifluzamide 24% SC @375ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Thiophanate methyl 41.7% SC @ 1000ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Propiconazole 10.7% + tricyclazole 34.2% SC @700 ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hexaconazole 5% + validamycin2.5% SC @1000 ml /ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Untreated 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
The phytotoxicity effect of the fungicide combination i.e., thifluzamide 10% + thiophanate methyl 65% SC on paddy crop was tested after 5 and 10 days after spraying. The crop was checked for symptoms like yellowing, necrosis, wilting, vein clearing, leaf tip or leaf margin dying and stunting or dwarfing of plants. After thorough observations, it could be concluded that the crop did not show any symptoms of phytotoxicity. Therefore, the present fungicide combination can be considered a safe molecule.
It is to be understood that this disclosure is not limited to a particular compositions or specific constituents, which can, of course, vary and that the terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing embodiments only and is not intended to be limiting the scope of the invention. As used in this specification and the appended claims, the singular forms "a," "an," and "the" include plural referents unless the content clearly dictates otherwise, and equivalents thereof known to those skilled in the art and so forth.
Unless defined otherwise, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by those skilled in the art to which this disclosure pertains. Although any methods and materials similar or equivalent to those described herein can be used in the practice for testing of the disclosure(s), specific examples of appropriate materials and methods are described herein. The examples set forth above are provided to give those of ordinarily skilled in the art a complete description of how to make and use the embodiments of the compositions or specific constituents, methods of practice, and are not intended to limit the scope of what the inventors regard as their invention. Modifications of the above-described modes for carrying out the invention that is obvious to persons skilled in the art are intended to be within the scope of the following claims. All patents and publications mentioned in the specification are indicative of the levels of skill of those skilled in the art to which the disclosure pertains.
While specific embodiments of the present invention are explicitly disclosed herein, the above specification and examples herein are illustrative and not restrictive. It will be understood that various modifications may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. Many variations of the disclosure will become apparent to those skilled in the art upon review of this specification and the embodiments below. The full scope of the invention should be determined by reference to the embodiments, along with their full scope of equivalents and the specification, along with such variations. Accordingly, other embodiments are within the scope of the following claims. ,CLAIMS:CLAIMS:
We Claim:
A synergistic fungicidal composition comprising:
at least one succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) fungicide;
at least one thiophanate methyl and
at least one agriculturally acceptable excipient.
The composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) fungicide is thifluzamide.
The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein thifluzamide and thiophanate methyl are present in the weight ratio of (1-20): (1-80).
The composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the agriculturally acceptable excipient selected from liquid medium, wetting agent, anti-freezing agent, antifoaming agent, dispersing agent, antibacterial agent and/or adjuvant.
The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein the formulation is suspension concentrate (SC).
The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein the composition controls different groups of fungi selected from ascomycota, deuteromycota, basidiomycota and oomycota on a wide variety of crops selected rice, wheat, fruits, roots, tubers, vegetables, maize, grains, sugarcane, cereals and field crops.
The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein the composition is applied at different stages of crops for preventive, curative and systemic activity by conventional spraying methods over the target areas of crops.