DESC:Synergistic Insecticidal Combination of Profenofos and Chlorantraniliprole
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising the combination of organophosphate insecticides and chlorantraniliprole in EC / WDG / SC / SL / OD / OS / Solid Granules and other formulations in different percentages. More precisely, the subject of the present invention is a synergistic insecticidal composition based on a combination of profenofos and chlorantraniliprole 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 insecticidal composition thereof and use of this combination for combating insecticides in and on the seeds and plants at different growth stages for crop protection and good yields.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Crop protection is the practice of protecting the crop yields from pests, weeds, plant diseases, and other organisms that damage agricultural crops, which is critical from early stages of crop development. Preventing pests and diseases in the entire crop cycle, i.e., from root development to maturing crop, leads to increased crop quality and yield. The control of insects is extremely important in achieving high crop efficiency. Generally, insects are very destructive to crop plants and can significantly reduce crop yields and quality. Insecticides help to minimize this damage by controlling insect pests. The use of two or more appropriate active ingredient combinations in specific dose ratios leads to synergism in crop protection. Many products are commercially available for these purposes, but there is still a continues need to develop new insecticidal 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 insects, in addition to long lasting and broad-spectrum of protection from insects. Another challenge is to reduce the excessive application of solo chemical compounds or insecticides which invariably helps in rapid selection of insects and aid in developing natural or adapted resistance against the active compound in question.
Therefore, it is indeed necessary to use the insecticidal combinations in lower doses, fast acting with the different mode of action that can provide long lasting control against broad spectrum of insects and check the resistance development in insects. The composition should have high synergistic action, no cross resistance to existing insecticides, avoid excess loading of the toxicant to the environment and negligible impact to environmental safety. A need also exists for synergistic insecticidal compositions which could be physico-compatible formulations in the form of storage stable, safely packed, ready to use formulation.
OBJECT OF THE INVENTION
The principal object of the present invention is to provide an insecticidal mixture or combination which solves at least one of the major problems discussed above like reducing the dosage rate, broadening the spectrum of activity, or combining activity with prolonged pest control and resistance management with improved environmental safety by reducing toxicity and residue deposit in soil and in crops.
The details of one or more embodiments of this disclosure are set forth in the accompanying description below and other features, objects, and advantages will be apparent from the description and the claims.
DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
The present disclosure / specification refers to a synergistic insecticidal composition and the process for the preparation for crop protection.
The term “combination” can be replaced with the words “mixture” or “composition” defined or refers to as combining two or more active ingredients formulated in desired formulations.
The term “pesticide” as used in this specification refers to a substance or mixture of substances intended for preventing, destroying, repelling, or mitigating any pest or weeds which causes damage to the crop. Herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides are mainly used as pesticides which control weeds and insect pests and disease-causing pathogens respectively that eventually leads to high yield of crops.
The term “insecticide” as used in this specification refers to a type of chemical compound or substance specifically designed to protect crops and kill or control insects in various agricultural, residential, and public health settings. Integrated pest management practices are encouraged, combining multiple strategies, including cultural, biological, and chemical methods, to reduce reliance on insecticides solely and promote pest control.
The term “synergism” as used in this specification refers to the interaction between two or more active compounds or other factors to produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects. The present invention involves the mixture of two active ingredients which has increased efficacy when compared to individual use and admixture of those components.
Conventional insecticides have poor activity, limited to certain insects, and are not satisfactorily maintained for prolonged periods. Even though some insecticides may bear satisfactory insecticidal effects, but they require improvements in respect of environment and health safety and are also required to achieve a high insecticidal effect at a smaller dosage and lack resistance management.
We found that this objective in part or 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 have found that by combining insecticide composition having profenofos and chlorantraniliprole in different formulation and percentages have astonishing effects of controlling insects and by reducing amount of dosage than in a case of using an active compound alone and admixture of those compounds.
Therefore, the present invention provides a novel synergistic insecticidal composition having profenofos and chlorantraniliprole and purpose thereof. The synergy of insecticidal composition has the main effective components of profenofos and chlorantraniliprole and acts by inhibition of enzyme, acetylcholine esterase and ryanodine receptor, respectively and can generate efficient synergism by means of contact, stomach and ovicidal action and can enable broad spectrum satisfactory insect control and protect the several crop from sucking, chewing, caterpillars, borer pests and soil insects for prolonged period at lower dose with no phytotoxic 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 for foliar applications or soil applications.
This insecticidal combination can effectively control sucking, chewing, caterpillars, borer insects and soil insects and check the resistance development in insects in several crops. This combination is also helpful in controlling insect vectors which transmit viral diseases in plants, and it can also be used in public health and household purposes for pest control. This can be a unique insecticide combination than the existing ones.
The present invention comprising the mixture of two active ingredients which are organophosphate insecticide and chlorantraniliprole are described herein thereof.
Organophosphates (OP) are chemical substances produced by the process of esterification between phosphoric acid and alcohol. Organophosphates insecticides exert their effects by irreversibly binding with acetylcholinesterase enzyme and inhibits its activity. Acetylcholinesterase enzyme is responsible for hydrolysis of acetylcholine (Ach) in the nervous system. When an organophosphate inhibits acetylcholinesterase enzyme, excessive acetylcholine accumulates in the synapse, leading to overstimulation and eventual death.
Profenofos (IUPAC name: 4-bromo-2-chloro-1-[ethoxy(propylsulfanyl) phosphoryl] oxybenzene); molecular formula: C11H15BrClO3PS) is a broad-spectrum organophosphate (OP), non-systemic insecticide and acaricide which exhibits a translaminar effect and has ovicidal properties used for insect and mite control on a wide variety of crops and outstanding profile of low mammalian toxicity. Profenofos involves inhibition of the enzyme acetylcholinesterase (AChE) via phosphorylation of the serine residue at the active site of the enzyme. This inhibition leads to accumulation of acetylcholine and ultimately cause neurotoxicity in the central and/or peripheral nervous system leads to death of pest. It is used to control tobacco budworm, cotton bollworm, armyworms (fall, beet), cotton aphid, spider mites, plant bugs, flea hoppers, and whiteflies on cotton, maize, sugar beet, soya beans, potatoes, vegetables, tobacco, and other crops.
Chlorantraniliprole (IUPAC name: 5-bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6-(methyl carbamoyl)phenyl]-2-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl) pyrazole-3-carboxamide; molecular formula: C18H14BrCl2N5O2) exhibits excellent differential selectivity for insect ryanodine receptors over mammalian ryanodine receptors. The ryanodine receptor is a ligand-gated calcium channel found in neuromuscular cells of insects. The activation of the ryanodine receptors precipitates an uncontrolled release of cellular calcium and results in uncontrolled muscle contraction, lethargy, paralysis and feeding cessation followed by the death of target organisms.
The first embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
Organophosphate insecticide; and
chlorantraniliprole.
First aspect of the first embodiment, the organophosphate insecticide is selected from the group comprising azothoate, bromophos, bromophos-ethyl, chlorthiophos, cyanophos, cythioate, dicapthon, dichlofenthion, etaphos, famphur, fenchlorphos, fenitrothion, fensulfothion, fenthion, fenthion-ethyl, heterophos, jodfenphos, mesulfenfos, parathion, parathion-methyl, phosnichlor, profenofos, prothiofos, sulprofos, temephos, trichlormetaphos-3, and trifenofos; preferably profenofos.
Second aspect of the first embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of organophosphate insecticide and chlorantraniliprole; wherein organophosphate insecticide and chlorantraniliprole are present in the weight ratio of (1-80): (1-80); preferably in the ratio of (1-60): (1-20).
The second embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
organophosphate insecticide;
chlorantraniliprole; and
at least one agriculturally acceptable excipient.
First aspect of the second embodiment, the organophosphate insecticide is selected from the group comprising azothoate, bromophos, bromophos-ethyl, chlorthiophos, cyanophos, cythioate, dicapthon, dichlofenthion, etaphos, famphur, fenchlorphos, fenitrothion, fensulfothion, fenthion, fenthion-ethyl, heterophos, jodfenphos, mesulfenfos, parathion, parathion-methyl, phosnichlor, profenofos, prothiofos, sulprofos, temephos, trichlormetaphos-3, and trifenofos; preferably profenofos.
Second aspect of the second embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of organophosphate insecticide and chlorantraniliprole; wherein organophosphate insecticide and chlorantraniliprole are present in the weight ratio of (1-80): (1-80); preferably in the ratio of (1-60): (1-20).
The 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.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, surfactant includes wetting agent and emulsifier.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, emulsifier includes anionic emulsifier, cationic emulsifier, non-ionic emulsifier, amphoteric emulsifier, phospholipids, and glyceryl esters.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, anionic emulsifier selected from but not limited to sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS), sodium dodecyl benzenesulfonate (SDBS), alkyl sulfates, and calcium alkyl benzene sulfonate.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, cationic emulsifier selected from but not limited to cetyl trimethyl ammonium bromide (CTAB), and stearalkonium chloride.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, non-ionic emulsifier selected from but not limited to polysorbate, sorbitan monolaurate, ethoxylates, sorbitan monooleate, polyalkyl sulfate esters, and polyaryl sulfate esters.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, amphoteric emulsifier selected from but not limited to cocamidopropyl betaine, lauramidopropyl betaine, ethoxylated nonylphenol (nonylphenol ethoxylate), ethoxylated sorbitan esters, and ethoxylated fatty alcohols.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, wetting agent selected from but not limited to alkyl aryl sulfonates, alkyl phenol ethoxylates, alkyl polyglucosides, polyethylene glycol esters, polysorbate, polyethylene oxide (PEO), ethoxylated fatty alcohols, ethoxylated vegetable oils, ethoxylated sorbitan esters, propylene glycol esters, sodium lauryl sulfate, cocoamidopropyl betaine and block copolymers selected from the but not limited to styrene-butadiene block copolymer (SBS), butyl based block copolymer, poly(ethylene oxide)-poly(propylene oxide)-poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO-PPO-PEO), polystyrene-poly(ethylene oxide) (PS-PEO), poly(butadiene)-poly(styrene) (PB-PS), poly(methyl methacrylate)-poly(butadiene)-poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA-PB-PMMA), poly(capro lactone)-poly(ethylene glycol) (PCL-PEG), and poly(ethylene glycol)-poly(propylene glycol)-poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG-PPG-PEG).
Further aspect of the second embodiment, stabilizer includes antioxidant, chelating agent, pH adjuster, UV absorber, stabilizing polymer, and inert.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, stabilizer selected from group vegetable and seed oils selected from but not limited to soybean oil, sunflower seed oil, coconut oil, peanut oil, corn oil, castor oil, palm oil, rapeseed oil, safflower oil, olive oil, corn oil, cottonseed oil, linseed oil, tung oil and sesame oil and their oxidized forms of the above oils.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, pH adjuster is triethanolamine.
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.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, antifoaming agent 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.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, dispersing agent 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.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, adjuvant includes but not limited to spreader, modifier, sticker, penetrant, drift control agent, 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.
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), dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid and sodium salt (DBSA).
The third embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
profenofos;
chlorantraniliprole;
emulsifier;
stabilizer; and
adjuvant.
The first aspect of the third embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of profenofos and chlorantraniliprole; wherein profenofos and chlorantraniliprole are present in the weight ratio of (1-80): (1-80); preferably in the ratio of (1-60): (1-20).
The second aspect of the third embodiment, agriculturally acceptable excipient selected from but not limited to the group comprising emulsifier, stabilizer, and adjuvant. 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, emulsifier includes anionic emulsifier, and non-ionic emulsifier.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, anionic emulsifier selected from but not limited to sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS), sodium dodecyl benzenesulfonate (SDBS), alkyl sulfates, and calcium alkyl benzene sulfonate; preferably calcium alkyl benzene sulfonate.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, non-ionic emulsifier selected from but not limited to polysorbate, sorbitan monolaurate, ethoxylates, sorbitan monooleate, polyalkyl sulfate esters, and polyaryl sulfate esters; preferably polyaryl sulfate esters.
Further aspect of the second embodiment, stabilizer includes antioxidant, chelating agent, pH adjuster, UV absorber, stabilizing polymer and inert.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, stabilizer selected from group vegetable and seed oils selected from but not limited to soybean oil, sunflower seed oil, coconut oil, peanut oil, corn oil, castor oil, palm oil, rapeseed oil, safflower oil, olive oil, corn oil, cottonseed oil, linseed oil, tung oil and sesame oil and their oxidized forms.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, pH adjuster is triethanolamine.
Further aspect of the third embodiment, adjuvant includes but not limited to spreader, modifier, sticker, penetrant, drift control agent, 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 bentonite.
The fourth embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
profenofos; and
chlorantraniliprole.
First aspect of the fourth embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of profenofos and chlorantraniliprole; wherein profenofos and chlorantraniliprole are present in the weight ratio of (1-80): (1-80); preferably in the ratio of (1-60): (1-20). more preferably in the ratio of (1-40): (1-10).
Second aspect of the fourth embodiment, the composition of the fourth embodiment comprising at least one agriculturally acceptable excipient thereof which is / are used in preparation desired formulation.
Further aspect of the fourth embodiment, the composition of fourth embodiment is formulated as oil dispersion (OD).
Further aspect of the fourth embodiment, the composition of the fourth embodiment is formulated as suspension concentrates (SC).
Further aspect of the fourth embodiment, the composition of fourth embodiment is formulated as micro-emulsion (ME).
Further aspect of the fourth embodiment, the composition of fourth embodiment is formulated as emulsifiable concentrate (EC).
Further aspect of the fourth embodiment, the composition of fourth embodiment is formulated as water dispersible granule (WDG).
The fifth embodiment of the present invention provides a synergistic insecticidal composition comprising:
profenofos;
chlorantraniliprole;
vegetable oil;
calcium alkyl benzene sulfonate;
polyaryl sulfate esters;
bentonite; and
triethanolamine.
First aspect of the fifth embodiment, synergistic insecticidal composition comprising a combination of profenofos and chlorantraniliprole; wherein profenofos and chlorantraniliprole are present in the weight ratio of (1-80): (1-80); preferably in the ratio of (1-60): (1-20); more preferably in the ratio of (1-40): (1-10).
Further aspect of the fifth embodiment, the composition of fifth embodiment is formulated as oil dispersion (OD).
Another embodiment of the present invention provides a process for the preparation of an insecticidal formulation comprising:
add vegetable oil into premix vessel;
add profenofos and chlorantraniliprole to the above mixture and stir for 30-60 minutes to get homogenous mixture;

after mixing the above material, optionally mill or grind to get the desired particle size and remove any oversized particles or agglomerate;

add emulsifier and pH adjuster to the above mixture and stir for 45 minutes;

then add thickener up 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 insecticidal composition obtained from the present used to control and destroys insect pests such as but not limited to aphids, whiteflies, trims, leafhoppers, leaf miners, sawflies, mole cricket, white grubs, jassids, thrips, lace bugs, billbugs, beetles, mealybugs, sawfly larvae, fleas, cockroaches, ticks, ants, carpet beetles, and mosquitoes on several crops.
Another embodiment of the present invention, the insecticidal composition obtained from the present used to controls the insects in numerous crops such as but not limited to paddy, cereals, fruits, vegetables, flowers and ornamental plants, trees, field crops and others. Fruit crops such as apples, citrus fruits, grapes, and berries. Vegetable crops include tomatoes, peppers, cucumbers, and leafy greens. Field crops like corn, soybeans, cotton, and wheat.
Another embodiment of the present invention, the insecticidal composition further comprises at least another agrochemical selected from a fungicide, insecticide, herbicide, biocide, nutrient, plant growth regulator, plant activator, fertilizers and likewise.
Another embodiment of the present invention, the insecticidal composition obtained from the present shows synergistic effects of better pest control with minimum resistance and resurgence and improved crop yield and quality.
Another embodiment of the present invention, the synergistic insecticidal composition can be used for prophylactic application and control the pests by applying effective amount of insecticidal composition over the target areas by conventional spraying methods, such as foliar application, soil drenching etc., and avoiding excessive drift or runoff of the composition, securing thorough coverage.
Another embodiment of the present invention, synergistic insecticidal combination decreases natural hazardous effect of single active ingredient and minimizes the residue deposition in environment.
Advantages of the Present Invention:
The synergistic insecticidal composition of the present invention can be used for prophylactic application and control the pests to increase the yield of crops compare to single component of composition, market standards and admixture of those components.
It has enhanced efficacy by combining insecticides with different modes of action, the mixture can effectively control a broader spectrum of insect pests and reduce the likelihood of resistance development and resurgence.
These insecticides may exhibit synergistic effects when combined, meaning their combined action is more potent than the sum of their individual actions. This synergy can improve the overall effectiveness of pest control, leading to better pest management outcomes.
The use of a combination of insecticides can help slow down the development of insecticide resistance in pest populations. By reducing the selection pressure on a specific mode of action, insects are less likely to develop resistance to any single insecticide in the mixture.
The synergistic insecticidal composition of the present invention will bring down pest load by targeting pests with a mixture of insecticides thereby reducing crop damage with increased yield.
The synergistic insecticidal composition of the present invention shows flexibility under different environmental conditions or against different pest species. By using a combination of insecticides, farmers and pest control operators can adapt their pest management strategies based on specific pest load and environmental factors.
The synergistic insecticidal composition of present invention has cost-effectiveness by combining insecticides with different properties may reduce the overall amount of each individual insecticide needed for effective pest control, potentially lowering the cost.
The best mode of carrying present invention is described in the below given examples. These examples are merely for illustrative purposes only, not to determine the scope of the invention and in no way limit the scope or spirit of the present invention.
EXAMPLES:
EXAMPLE 1: OIL DISPERSION (OD) FORMULATION OF SYNERGISTIC INSECTICIDAL COMPOSITION OF THE PRESENT INVENTION:
TABLE 1:
S. No Ingredient Weight/ Weight %
1 Profenofos 40
2 Chlorantraniliprole 6
3 Calcium alkyl benzene sulfonate 2
4 Polyaryl sulfate esters 8
5 Bentonite SD-2 1.5
6 Triethanolamine 2
7 Vegetable oil QS
Total 100

EXAMPLE 2: BIO EFFICACY AND PHYTOTOXICITY TESTS OF THE PRESENT INVENTION
Presently to evaluate the efficacy of profenofos + chlorantraniliprole in OD formulation against defoliating and sucking pests on different crops and to test their phytotoxicity on the crop after two sprayings have been conducted. For evaluation, one defoliating pest is screen which is leaf folder in paddy, one internal feeding insect is screened which is shoot and fruit borer in brinjal and finally one sucking pest is evaluated i.e., whitefly in cotton crop. Along with profenofos + chlorantraniliprole as a combination, both the insecticides are tested individually, and the market standards selected were emamectin benzoate 5% SG and flubendiamide 38.39% SC. The combination is tested at three dose levels viz., low, medium, and high along with the sole molecule as individual treatments and their efficiency comparison is done with the current competitive market standards. The combination tested at three different formulation strengths i.e., profenofos + chlorantraniliprole (@400ml/ha) OD formulation, profenofos + chlorantraniliprole (@500ml/ha) OD formulation and profenofos + chlorantraniliprole (@600ml/ha) OD formulation. 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 two sprays are done when the pests reach their ETL. The interval between the two sprays is 15 days.
Method of Observations:
No. of insects (larva/adult/nymph) /plant or no. of damaged shoot/plant: select 5 random plants in the plot and count the number of insects or number of damaged shoots per plant are recorded.
The observations were taken at 1 day before spraying and at 1 day, 4 days, 7 days, and 10 days after spraying. The average number of insects were also calculated at the end of each spray (two sprays).
Take the observation on the crop safety of the insecticide i.e., phytotoxicity / softener observation of herbicide after application at 5 and 10 days after application.
Parameters of Observations:
The insect pests controlled in each treatment are counted as number of larvae or as number of adults/nymphs per plant and then calculated as percent reduction in population over untreated or controlled plot. The percent reduction is calculated by the following formula –
% reduction = (No.of insects in control plot-No.of insects in treated plot )/(No.of insects in control plot)× 100
*Damaged shoot/plant in case of brinjal
The effect of these insecticides in combination and alone when applied on paddy crop is assessed based on the yield (quintal per hectare). This parameter defines the crop quality.
Results:
The insecticide combination of profenofos + chlorantraniliprole is effective against wide range of insect pests, so the different insect pests controlled in different crops in the field experiments were enlisted below:
Paddy – Leaf folder (Cnaphalocrocus medinalis)
Brinjal – Fruit and Shoot borer (Leucinodes orbonalis)
Cotton – Whiteflies (Bemesia tabaci)

Example – 2.1: Paddy Leaf folder
Table 1. Efficacy of first spray application of profenofos 40% + chlorantraniliprole 6% OD formulation against leaf folder in paddy:
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of larva per plant (Days after spraying) % Reduction in larval population (Days after spraying)
Pre 1 4 7 10 AVG 1 4 7 10 AVG
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 400 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.54 45.56 60.00 64.55 70.00 60.03
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 500 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.46 56.67 70.00 73.64 75.00 68.83
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 600 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.44 56.67 70.00 73.64 80.00 70.08
Profenofos 50% EC 2000 0.8 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.72 23.33 30.00 46.36 60.00 39.92
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 0.8 0.2 0.4 0.8 1 0.64 67.78 60.00 37.27 50.00 53.76
Emamectin benzoate 5% SG 220 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.6 1 0.62 23.33 80.00 55.45 50.00 52.20
Flubendiamide 38.39% SC 125 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.8 1.2 0.76 23.33 60.00 37.27 40.00 40.15
Untreated -- 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 2 1.16 0 0 0 0 0.00
The leaf folder population before initiating the spraying was recorded in between 0.7-0.8 larvae per plant in Paddy. After the first application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination profenofos + chlorantraniliprole when applied at 500 ml/ha and 600 ml/ha showed maximum reduction in leaf folder population of 0.3-0.4 larva/plant at 1, 4 Days after spraying and 0.4-0.6 larva/plant at 7 and 10 days after spraying in both treatments. The average leaf folder population after the entire spraying was recorded to be lowest in profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 600 ml/ha with 0.44 larva/plant followed by profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 500 ml/ha with 0.46 larva/plant which were performing superior to market standards. The percent reduction in larval population recorded in all the treatments proved that profenofos + chlorantraniliprole when applied at 600 ml/ha was showing maximum reduction in larval population as 70.80% and at 500 ml/ha recorded 68.83% there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the doses of 600, 500 ml/ha showed synergistic activity and leaf folder population control was superior to market standard. Even the treatment profenofos + chlorantraniliprole when applied at 400 ml/ha (lowest dose of the insecticide combination) also showed a percent reduction of 60.03% which was also superior to the market standard. Though the first spray application of combination insecticides showed significant reduction in leaf folder population in paddy. The percent reduction was only 60% hence there are chances that the pest population might increase later and to prevent that second spray application the insecticidal combination was carried out.
Table 2. Efficacy of second spray application of profenofos 40% + chlorantraniliprole 6% OD formulation against Leaf folder in Paddy:
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of larva per plant
(Days after spraying) % Reduction in larval
population
(Days after spraying)
Pre 1 4 7 10 AVG 1 4 7 10 AVG
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 400 0.5 0 0 0 0 0.36 75.00 100 100 100 93.75
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 500 0.6 0 0 0 0 0.44 70.00 100 100 100 92.50
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 600 0.4 0 0 0 0 0.4 80.00 100 100 100 95.00
Profenofos 50% EC 2000 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.7 60.00 72.73 75.00 75.00 70.68
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 50.00 90.91 91.67 92.86 81.36
Emamectin benzoate 5% SG 220 1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.12 50.00 86.36 87.50 89.29 78.29
Flubendiamide 38.39% SC 125 1.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.08 40.00 90.91 91.67 92.86 78.86
Untreated -- 2 2.2 2.4 2.8 3 2.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
The leaf folder population before initiating the second spray was recorded in between 0.4-2 larvae per plant in paddy. This population recorded at the end of the first spraying. After the second application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments profenofos + chlorantraniliprole when applied at 400 ml/ha, 500 ml/ha and 600 ml/ha showed maximum reduction in leaf folder population by recording 0 larva/plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 days after spraying. The average leaf folder population after the entire spraying was recorded to be lowest in profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 600 ml/ha with 0.40 larva/plant followed by profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 500 ml/ha with 0.44 larva/plant which were performing superior to market standards. The percentage of reduction in larval population recorded in all the treatments proved that profenofos + chlorantraniliprole when applied at 600 ml/ha was showing maximum reduction in larval population as 95% followed by profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 400 ml/ha with 93.75% reduction and at 500 ml/ha recorded 92.50% there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the doses of 600, 500 and 400 ml/ha showed synergistic activity and leaf folder population control was superior to market standard. The insecticide molecules applied in combination when applied solely showed lesser control of leaf folder like when profenofos 50% EC @ 2000ml/ha recorded on 70.68% reduction in the larval population at the end of two sprays while chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC recorded 81.36% reduction. Though they are significantly controlling the larval population the same molecules when applied in combination with lesser strength recorded higher control in larval population proving combination insecticide is more reliable.
Table 3. Effect of profenofos 40% + chlorantraniliprole 6% OD formulation on yield in Paddy:
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Yield (q/ha)
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 400 45
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 500 49
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 600 52
Profenofos 50% EC 2000 43
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 44
Emamectin benzoate 5% SG 220 42
Flubendiamide 38.39% SC 125 40
Untreated -- 30
The yield of paddy recorded in different treatments as shown in the table above (Table 3.) implies that the combination molecule at the three doses positively affected the yield of the crop. The highest yield was recorded in profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 600 ml/ha with 52q/ha, followed by profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 500 ml/ha with 49 q/ha and profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 400 ml/ha with 45 q/ha. While the individual molecules and market standards recorded yields ranging between 40-44 q/ha which were inferior to the yield recorded in the combination molecule treatments
Table 4. Phytotoxicity of profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD formulation on paddy:
Treatments Days Visual Rating Scale
Yellowing Necrosis Wilting Vein
Clearing Leaf tip / Margin Dying Stunting / Dwarfing
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 400ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 500ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 600ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 50% EC @ 2000ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC @ 150ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Emamectin benzoate 5% SG @ 220ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Flubendiamide 38.39% SC @ 125ml/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 insecticide combination i.e., profenofos + chlorantraniliprole on paddy crop was tested after 5 and 10 days after spraying. The crop was checked for symptoms like yellowing, necrosis, wilting, vein clearing, leaf tip or leaf margin dying and stunting or dwarfing of plants. After thorough observations, it could be concluded that the crop did not show any symptoms of phytotoxicity. Therefore, the present insecticide combination can be considered a combination.

Example – 2.2: Shoot and fruit borer in Brinjal
Table 5. Efficacy of first spray application of profenofos 40% + chlorantraniliprole 6% OD formulation against shoot and fruit borer in brinjal:
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Damaged shoot / plant
(Days after spraying) % Reduction in larval population
(Days after spraying)
Pre 5 10 AVG 5 10 AVG
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 400 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.47 69.23 78.26 73.75
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 500 0.6 0.2 0.4 0.40 84.62 82.61 83.61
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 600 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.33 84.62 86.96 85.79
Profenofos 50% EC 2000 0.6 0.5 1.3 0.80 61.54 43.48 52.51
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 0.5 0.5 1.9 0.97 61.54 17.39 39.46
Emamectin benzoate 5% SG 220 0.6 0.5 1.1 0.73 61.54 52.17 56.86
Flubendiamide 38.39% SC 125 0.5 0.5 1 0.67 61.54 56.52 59.03
Untreated -- 0.5 1.3 2.3 1.37 0.00 0.00 0.00
The number of damaged shoots by shoot and fruit borer in brinjal before initiating the spraying was recorded in between 0.5-0.6 damaged shoots per plant in brinjal. After the first application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments profenofos + chlorantraniliprole when applied at 500 ml/ha and 600 ml/ha recorded 0.2 damaged shoots/plant at 5 Days after spraying and 0.3-0.4 damaged shoots/plant at 10 Days after spraying in both treatments. The average number of damaged shoots per plant after the first spraying was recorded to be lowest in profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 600 ml/ha with 0.33 damaged shoots/plant followed by profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 500 ml/ha with 0.40 damaged shoots/plant which were performing superior to market standards. The percentage reduction in damage recorded in all the treatments proved that profenofos + chlorantraniliprole when applied at 600 ml/ha was showing maximum reduction in damaged shoots as 85.79% and at 500 ml/ha recorded 83.61% there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the doses of 600, 500 ml/ha showed synergistic activity and control evaluated based on damage caused by shoot and fruit borer was superior to market standard. Even the treatment profenofos + chlorantraniliprole when applied at 400 ml/ha (lowest dose of the insecticide combination) also showed a percent reduction of 73.75% which was also superior to the market standard. Though the first spray application of combination insecticides showed significant reduction in damage by shoot and fruit borer in brinjal. As shoot and fruit borer is an internal feeder there are chances that the pest population might increase and cause higher damage and to prevent that second spray application the insecticidal combination was carried out.
Table 6. Efficacy of second spray application of profenofos 40% + chlorantraniliprole 6% OD formulation against shoot and fruit borer in brinjal:
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Damaged shoot / plant (Days after spraying) % Reduction in larval population
(Days after spraying)
Pre 5 10 AVG 5 10 AVG
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 400 0.5 0.2 0.4 0.37 93.75 91.30 92.53
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 500 0.4 0 0.2 0.20 100.00 95.65 97.83
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 600 0.3 0 0.1 0.13 100.00 97.83 98.91
Profenofos 50% EC 2000 1.3 1.4 1.8 1.50 56.25 60.87 58.56
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 1.9 2.5 1.6 2.00 21.88 65.22 43.55
Emamectin benzoate 5% SG 220 1.1 1.1 2.2 1.47 65.63 52.17 58.90
Flubendiamide 38.39% SC 125 1 1.1 2.4 1.50 65.63 47.83 56.73
Untreated -- 2.3 3.2 4.6 3.37 0.00 0.00 0.00
The number of damaged shoots by shoot and fruit borer in brinjal before initiating the spraying was recorded in between 0.3-2.3 damaged shoots per plant in brinjal. After the second application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments profenofos + chlorantraniliprole when applied at 500 ml/ha and 600 ml/ha recorded 0 damaged shoots/plant at 5 Days after spraying and 0.1-0.2 damaged shoots/plant at 10 Days after spraying in both treatments. The average number of damaged shoots per plant after the first spraying was recorded to be lowest in profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 600 ml/ha with 0.13 damaged shoots/plant followed by profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 500 ml/ha with 0.20 damaged shoots/plant which were performing superior to market standards. The percentage of reduction in damage recorded in all the treatments proved that profenofos + chlorantraniliprole when applied at 600 ml/ha was showing maximum reduction in damaged shoots as 98.91% and at 500 ml/ha recorded 97.83% there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the doses of 600, 500 ml/ha showed synergistic activity and control evaluated based on damage caused by shoot and fruit borer was superior to market standard. Even the treatment profenofos + chlorantraniliprole when applied at 400 ml/ha (lowest dose of the insecticide combination) also showed a percentage of reduction of 92.53% which was also superior to the market standard. Though the first spray application of combination insecticides showed significant reduction in damage by shoot and fruit borer in brinjal. The insecticide molecules applied in combination when applied solely showed lesser control of shoot and fruit borer like when profenofos 50% EC @ 2000ml/ha recorded on 58.56% reduction in the damage at the end of two sprays while chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC recorded 43.55% reduction. Though they are significantly controlling the damage caused by shoot and fruit borer the same molecules when applied in combination with lesser strength recorded higher control in damage proving combination insecticide is more reliable.
Table 7. Effect of profenofos 40% + chlorantraniliprole 6% OD formulation on yield in brinjal:
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Yield
(q/ha)
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 400 240
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 500 262
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 600 280
Profenofos 50% EC 2000 232
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 235
Emamectin Benzoate 5% SG 220 228
Flubendiamide 38.39% SC 125 225
Untreated -- 195
The fruit yield of brinjal recorded in different treatments as shown in the table above (Table 7.) implies that the combination molecule at the three doses positively affected the yield of the crop. The highest yield was recorded in profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 600 ml/ha with 280q/ha, followed by profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 500 ml/ha with 262q/ha and profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 400 ml/ha with 240q/ha. While the individual molecules and market standards recorded yields ranging between 225-235q/ha which were inferior to the yield recorded in the combination molecule treatments
Table 8. Phytotoxicity of profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD formulation on brinjal crop:
Treatments Days Visual Rating Scale
Yellowing Necrosis Wilting Vein
Clearing Leaf tip / Margin Dying Stunting / Dwarfing
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 400ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 500ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 600ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 50% EC @ 2000ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC @ 150ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Emamectin benzoate 5% SG @ 220ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Flubendiamide 38.39% SC @ 125ml/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 insecticide combination i.e., profenofos + chlorantraniliprole on brinjal crop was tested after 5 and 10 days after spraying. The crop was checked for symptoms like yellowing, necrosis, wilting, vein clearing, leaf tip or leaf margin dying and stunting or dwarfing of plants. After thorough observations, it could be concluded that the crop did not show any symptoms of phytotoxicity. Therefore, the present insecticide combination can be considered a safe combination.

Example – 2.3: Whitefly in Cotton
Table 9. Efficacy of first spray application of profenofos 40% + chlorantraniliprole 6% OD formulation against Whitefly in cotton:
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of whiteflies (adults / nymphs) per plant (Days after spraying) % Reduction in whitefly population
Pre 1 4 7 10 AVG %
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 400 12 7 1 3 5 5.60 69.57
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 500 15 5 0 0 0 4.00 78.26
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 600 14 3 0 0 0 3.40 81.52
Profenofos 50% EC 2000 15 10 0 1 3 5.80 68.48
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 13 7 2 4 7 6.60 64.13
Emamectin benzoate 5% SG 220 15 9 2 0 2 5.60 69.57
Flubendiamide 38.39% SC 125 16 12 4 6 9 9.40 48.91
Untreated -- 13 15 18 21 25 18.40
The whitefly population before initiating the spraying was recorded in between 12-16 whiteflies per plant in cotton. After the first application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments profenofos + chlorantraniliprole when applied at 500 ml/ha and 600 ml/ha showed maximum reduction in whitefly population of 3-5 whiteflies/plant at 1 days after spraying and 0 whiteflies at 4, 7 and 10 days after spraying in both treatments. The average whitefly population after the entire spraying was recorded to be lowest in profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 600 ml/ha with 3.4 whiteflies/plant followed by profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 500 ml/ha with 4 whiteflies/plant which were performing superior to market standards. The percentage of reduction in whitefly population recorded in all the treatments proved that profenofos + chlorantraniliprole when applied at 600 ml/ha was showing maximum reduction in larval population as 81.52% and at 500 ml/ha recorded 78.26% there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the doses of 600, 500 ml/ha showed synergistic activity and leaf folder population control was superior to market standard. Even the treatment profenofos + chlorantraniliprole when applied at 400 ml/ha (lowest dose of the insecticide combination) also showed a percent reduction of 69.57% which was also superior to the market standard. Though the first spray application of combination insecticides showed significant reduction in whitefly population in cotton. Though the population is near ETL (economic threshold level), to prevent increase in whitefly population that second spray application the insecticidal combination was carried out.
Table 10. Efficacy of second spray application of profenofos 40% + chlorantraniliprole 6% OD formulation against whitefly in cotton.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) No. of whiteflies (adults / nymphs) per plant (Days after spraying) % Reduction in whitefly population
Pre 1 4 7 10 AVG %
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 400 5 4 0 0 0 1.00 97.10
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 500 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 100.00
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 600 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 100.00
Profenofos 50% EC 2000 3 1 0 2 5 2.00 94.20
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 7 5 0 2 6 3.25 90.58
Emamectin benzoate 5% SG 220 2 1 3 6 10 5.00 85.51
Flubendiamide 38.39% SC 125 9 7 2 9 16 8.50 75.36
Untreated -- 25 30 32 36 40 34.50 0
The leaf folder population before initiating the second spray was recorded in between 0-25 whiteflies per plant in cotton. This population is whitefly population recorded at the end of the first spraying. After the second application of different insecticide treatments, the insecticide combination treatments profenofos + chlorantraniliprole when applied at 500 ml/ha and 600 ml/ha showed maximum reduction in whitefly population by recording 0 whiteflies /plant at 1, 4, 7, 10 Days after spraying. The lowest dose of combination treatment i.e., profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 400ml/ ha recorded 4 whiteflies/ plant at 1 days after spraying and then 0 whiteflies/plant in 4, 7 and 10 days after spraying. The average whitefly population after the entire spraying was recorded to be lowest in profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 600 ml/ha and 500 ml/ha with 0 whitefly/plant followed by profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 400 ml/ha with 1 whitefly/plant which were performing superior to the market standards. The percentage of reduction in whitefly population recorded in all the treatments proved that profenofos + chlorantraniliprole when applied at 600 ml/ha and 500 ml/ha were showing maximum reduction in larval population as 100% followed by profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 400 ml/ha with 97.10% reduction there by proving that these molecules when applied in combination at the doses of 600, 500 and 400 ml/ha showed synergistic activity and control the whitefly population superior to market standard. The insecticide molecules when applied solely showed lesser control of whitefly like when profenofos 50% EC @ 2000ml/ha recorded on 94.20% reduction in the larval population at the end of two sprays while chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC recorded 90.58% reduction. Though they are significantly controlling the larval population when applied in combination with lesser strength recorded higher control in larval population proving combination insecticide is more reliable.
Table 11. Effect of Profenofos 40% + Chlorantraniliprole 6% OD formulation on yield in Cotton.
Treatments Dose
(g or ml / ha) Yield
(q/ha)
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 400 10
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 500 10.6
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD 600 12
Profenofos 50% EC 2000 9
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 150 9.4
Emamectin benzoate 5% SG 220 8.6
Flubendiamide 38.39% SC 125 8.1
Untreated -- 5
The boll yield of cotton recorded in different treatments as shown in the table above (Table 11.) implies that the combination molecule at the three doses positively affected the yield of the crop. The highest yield was recorded in profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 600 ml/ha with 12 q/ha, followed by profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 500 ml/ha with 10.6 q/ha and profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 400 ml/ha with 10 q/ha. While the individual molecules and market standards recorded yields ranging between 8.1-9.4 q/ha which were inferior to the yield recorded in the combination molecule treatments
Table 12. Phytotoxicity of profenofos + chlorantraniliprole OD formulation on Cotton crop.
Treatments Days Visual Rating Scale
Yellowing Necrosis Wilting Vein
Clearing Leaf tip / Margin Dying Stunting / Dwarfing
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 400ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 500ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos + chlorantraniliprole @ 600ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profenofos 50% EC @ 2000ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC @ 150ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Emamectin benzoate 5% SG @ 220ml/ha 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Flubendiamide 38.39% SC @ 125ml/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 insecticide combination i.e., profenofos + chlorantraniliprole on cotton crop was tested after 5 and 10 days after spraying. The crop was checked for symptoms like yellowing, necrosis, wilting, vein clearing, leaf tip or leaf margin dying and stunting or dwarfing of plants. After thorough observations, it could be concluded that the crop did not show any symptoms of phytotoxicity. Therefore, the present insecticide combination can be considered a safe molecule.
It is to be understood that this disclosure is not limited to a particular compositions or specific constituents, which can, of course, vary and that the terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing embodiments only and is not intended to be limiting the scope of the invention. As used in this specification and the appended claims, the singular forms "a," "an," and "the" include plural referents unless the content clearly dictates otherwise, and equivalents thereof known to those skilled in the art and so forth.
Unless defined otherwise, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by those skilled in the art to which this disclosure pertains. Although any methods and materials similar or equivalent to those described herein can be used in the practice for testing of the disclosure(s), specific examples of appropriate materials and methods are described herein. The examples set forth above are provided to give those of ordinarily skilled in the art a complete description of how to make and use the embodiments of the 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 insecticidal composition comprising:
at least one organophosphate insecticide;
chlorantraniliprole; and
at least one agriculturally acceptable excipient.
The composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein organophosphate insecticide is profenofos.
The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein profenofos and chlorantraniliprole are present in the weight ratio of (1-60): (1-20).
The composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the agriculturally acceptable excipient selected from the group comprising emulsifier, stabilizer, and/or adjuvant.
The composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the insecticidal composition is formulated as suspension concentrate (SC).
The composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the insecticidal composition is formulated as oil dispersion (OD).
The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein the insecticidal composition is used in paddy, cereals, fruits, vegetables, flowers and ornamental plants, trees, field crops and various other crops for general pest control.
The composition as claimed in preceding claims, wherein the synergistic insecticidal composition is used for prophylactic application and control the pest in various crops.