TERNARY HERBICIDAL COMBINATION

Abstract

A herbicidal combination comprising (A) clomazone; (B) 2,4-D or its derivatives; and (C) pyrazosulfuron or its derivatives, a composition comprising this combination and method of controlling weeds in sugarcane using this combination or composition is disclosed.

Claims

1. A herbicidal combination comprising (A) clomazone; (B) 2,4-D or its derivatives; and (C) pyrazosulfuron or its derivatives.

2. The combination as claimed in claim 1, wherein the 2,4-D or its derivatives are selected from the group consisting of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid; 4-D-ammonium; 2,4-D-butotyl; 2,4-D-2-butoxypropyl; 2,4-D-3-butoxypropyl; 2,4-D-butyl; 2,4-D-diethylamine; 2,4-D-dimethylamine; 2,4-D-diolamine; 2,4-D-dodecylamine; 2,4-D-ethyl; 2,4-D-2-ethylhexyl; 2,4-D-heptylamine; 2,4-D-isooctyl; 2,4-D-isopropyl; 2,4-D-isopropylamine; 2,4-D-lithium; 2,4-D-meptyl; 2,4-D-methyl; 2,4-D-octyl; 2,4-D-pentyl; 2,4-D-propyl; 2,4-D-sodium; 2,4-D-tefuryl; 2,4-D-tetradecylamine; 2,4-D-triethylamine; 2,4-D-tris(2-hydroxypropyl)amine; 2,4-D-trolamine and 2,4-D-choline.

3. The combination as claimed in claim 1, wherein the pyrazosulfuron or its derivatives are selected from the group consisting of pyrazosulfuron and pyrazosulfuron-ethyl.

4. The herbicidal composition of claim 1, further comprising an agrochemically acceptable excipients.

5. The herbicidal composition as claimed in claim 4, in the form of a granular formulation.

6. The herbicidal composition as claimed in claim 5, comprising about about 1.0% pyrazosulfuron-ethyl by total weight of the composition.

7. The herbicidal composition as claimed in claim 4, further comprising at least one dispersing agent, at least one binding agent, at least one wetting agent, or at least one defoamer.

8. A method for controlling an undesired weeds in sugarcane, said method comprising treating a locus at which said sugarcane is growing or is intended to be grown with an herbicidal combination comprising (A) a herbicidally effective amount of clomazone; (B) a herbicidally effective amount of 2,4-D or its derivatives; and (C) a synergistically effective amount of pyrazosulfuron or its derivatives.

9. The method as claimed in claim 8, wherein the herbicidal combination comprises less than about 1.0% pyrazosulfuron-ethyl by total weight of the composition.

10. The method as claimed in claim 9, wherein said weed is selected from the genera consisting of Echinochloa, Setaria, Panicum, Eleusine, Digitaria, Phleum, Cenchrus, Poa, Festuca, Eleusine, Brachiaria, Lolium, Bromus, Avena, Cyperus, Sorghum, Agropyron, Cynodon, Monochoria, Fimbristylis, Sagittaria, Eleocharis, Paspalum, Ischaemum, Sphenoclea, Dactyloctenium, Agrostis, Alopecurus, Apera; Dicotyledonous weeds of the genera: Sinapis, Lepidium, Galium, Stellaria, Matricaria, Anthemis, Galinsoga, Commelina, Ageratum, Chenopodium, Urtica, Senecio, Euphorbia, Acanthospermum, Amaranthus, Portulaca, Ipomoea, Xanthium, Convolvulus, Ipomoea, Polygonum, Sesbania, Ambrosia, Cirsium, Carduus, Sonchus, Solanum, Rorippa, Rotala, Lindernia, Lamium, Veronica, Abutilon, Emex, Datura, Viola, Galeopsis, Leptochloa, Papaver, Centaurea, Trifolium, Ranunculus, Taraxacum; Cyperus, and Scirpus.

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0022] Surprisingly, the present inventors have now found that when the combination of clomazone and 2,4-D was mixed with a reduced amount of pyrazosulfuron ethyl, the resultant combination showed improved synergistic effect. It was surprising that even a reduced amount of pyrazosulfuron-ethyl, which is a conventional rice herbicide, resulted in unexpectedly enhancing the efficacy of a combination of clomazone and 2,4-D, to a greater degree than expectable, for controlling undesired weeds in sugarcane.

[0023] Surprisingly, it has been found that the active compound combinations or compositions according to the invention do not only exhibit an additive effect of the activity of the individual components, but exert a synergistic effect when used in combination. Therefore, firstly, the customary application rates of the individual substances were reduced.

[0024] Therefore, in an aspect, the present invention provides herbicidal combination comprising (A) a herbicidally effective amount of clomazone; (B) a herbicidally effective amount of 2,4-D or its derivatives; and (C) a herbicidally effective amount of pyrazosulfuron or its derivatives.

[0025] In an embodiment, the herbicides or the combinations thereof contemplated according to the present invention may be pre-formulated and may be in the form of granules, which may be Water Dispersible Granules (WDG) or Granules (G) for broadcasting, Wettable Powders, Suspension Concentrates, Emulsifiable Concentrate, Suspoemulsions, Microemulsions. Capsule Suspensions etc. However, the choice of any preferred formulation type is not particularly limiting.

[0026] Adjuvants and ancillary ingredients may be used to formulate such pre formulated compositions and may employ wetting agents, adhesives, dispersants, penetrants, rain-fastening agents or surfactants and, if appropriate, solvent or oil and other agriculturally acceptable additives and adjuvants.

[0027] Therefore, in another aspect, the present invention provides a herbicidal composition comprising (A) a herbicidally effective amount of clomazone; (B) a herbicidally effective amount of 2,4-D or its derivatives; and (C) a herbicidally effective amount of pyrazosulfuron or its derivatives along with agrochemically acceptable excipients.

[0028] The compound 2,4-D or its derivatives shall include the compound 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid per se or any its derivatives including 2,4-D-ammonium; 2,4-D-butotyl: 2,4-D-2-butoxypropyl; 2,4-D-3-butoxypropyl; 2,4-D-butyl; 2,4-D-diethylamine: 2,4-D-dimethylamine; 2,4-D-diolamine; 2,4-D-dodecylamine; 2,4-D-ethyl; 2,4-D-2-ethylhexyl; 2,4-D-heptylamine; 2,4-D-isooctyl; 2,4-D-isopropyl: 2,4-D-isopropylamine; 2,4-D-lithium; 2,4-D-meptyl; 2,4-D-methyl; 2,4-D-octyl; 2,4-D-pentyl; 2,4-D-propyl; 2,4-D-sodium; 2,4-D-tefuryl; 2,4-D-tetradecylamine; 2,4-D-triethylamine; 2,4-D-tris(2-hydroxypropyl)amine; 2,4-D-trolamine and 2,4-D-choline.

[0029] In an embodiment, the preferred 2,4-D derivative is 2,4-D sodium.

[0030] The compound pyrazosulfuron or its derivatives shall include the compound 5-[(4,6-dimethoxypyrimidin-2-ylcarbamoyl)sulfamoyl]-1-methylpyrazole-4-carboxylic acid or an agriculturally acceptable salt or ester or a carboxylate salt thereof, including but not limited to, pyrazosulfuron-ethyl.

[0031] In an embodiment, the preferred pyrazosulfuron derivative is pyrazosulfuron-ethyl.

[0032] In an embodiment, clomazone is present within the compositions in an amount of 5% to 70% by total weight of the composition.

[0033] In another embodiment, 2,4-D or its derivative is present within the compositions in an amount of 10% to 70% by total weight of the composition.

[0034] It has been one of the surprising findings of the present invention that when the combination of clomazone and 2,4-D was mixed with a reduced amount of pyrazosulfuron-ethyl, the resultant combination showed improved synergistic effect. It was surprising that even a reduced amount of pyrazosulfuron-ethyl, which is a conventional rice herbicide, resulted in unexpectedly enhancing the efficacy of a combination of clomazone and 2,4-D, to a greater degree than expectable, for controlling undesired weeds in sugarcane.

[0035] Thus, in this embodiment, the present invention provides an improved herbicidal combination for the control of undesired weeds in sugarcane, said combination comprising (A) a herbicidally effective amount of clomazone; and (B) a herbicidally effective amount of 2,4-D or its derivatives; wherein the improvement comprises said combination additionally comprising (C) a synergistically effective amount of pyrazosulfuron or its derivatives.

[0036] The term synergistically effective amount of pyrazosulfuron or its derivatives means an amount of 0.1% to 5% by total weight of the composition.

[0037] In an embodiment of the present invention, the synergistically effective amount of pyrazosulfuron-ethyl comprises from about 0.1% to about 5% by total weight of the formulation. More preferably, the synergistically effective amount of pyrazosulfuron-ethyl according to the present invention comprise about 0.05% to about 4.0% by weight of pyrazosulfuron-ethyl. Still more preferably, the synergistically effective amount of pyrazosulfuron-ethyl according to the present invention comprise about, or less than about, 1.0% by total weight of the composition.

[0038] In an embodiment, the preferred composition according to the present invention is a granular formulation.

[0039] Therefore, in this embodiment, the present invention provides a granular formulation comprising: [0040] (A) a herbicidally effective amount of clomazone; [0041] (B) a herbicidally effective amount of 2,4-D or its derivatives; [0042] (C) a herbicidally effective amount of pyrazosulfuron or its derivatives; and [0043] (D) at least one agrochemically acceptable solid inert.

[0044] In this embodiment, the granular formulation of the present invention further comprises an agrochemically acceptable inert. These inerts must be agriculturally acceptable and environmentally friendly. Inerts may include such dispersing agents, antifoaming agents, pH modifiers, surfactants, and other fillers which may be added to stabilize the composition.

[0045] In an embodiment, the composition of each or any aspect or embodiment described hereinabove comprises at least one dispersing agent, at least one binding agent, at least one wetting agent and optionally at least one defoamer.

[0046] In one embodiment, the composition may contain ionic and nonionic dispersing agents to enable disintegration of granules in water with ease, such as salts of polystyrenesulphonic acids, salts of polyvinylsulphonic acids, salts of naphthalenesulphonic acid/formaldehyde condensates, salts of condensates of naphthalenesulphonic acid, phenolsulphonic acid and formaldehyde, modified styrene acrylic copolymer and salts of lignosulphonic acid, polyethylene oxide/polypropylene oxide block copolymers, polyethylene glycol ethers of linear alcohols, reaction products of fatty acids with ethylene oxide and/or propylene oxide, furthermore polyvinyl alcohol, polyvinylpyrrolidone, copolymers of polyvinyl alcohol and polyvinylpyrrolidone and copolymers of (meth)acrylic acid and (meth)acrylic esters, furthermore alkyl ethoxylates and alkylarylethoxylates. The preferred dispersing agents include modified styrene acrylic copolymer.

[0047] In an embodiment, the compositions of the present invention comprise at least one wetting agent selected from soaps; salts of aliphatic monoesters of sulphuric acid including but not limited to sodium lauryl sulphate; sulfoalkylamides and salts thereof including but not limited to N-methyl-N-oleoyltaurate Na salt; alkylarylsulfonates including but not limited to alkylbenzenesulfonates; alkylnaphthalenesulfonates and salts thereof and salts of ligninsulfonic acid. In an embodiment, the wetting agent includes a blend comprising an alkali metal salt of alkylnaphthalenesulfonate or an alkali metal salt of ligninsulfonic acid or a combination thereof.

[0048] In a preferred embodiment, the composition of the present invention comprises a wetting component comprising a wetting agent selected from an alkali or alkaline earth metal salt of alkyl naphthalenesulfonate or an alkali metal salt of ligninsulfonic acid or a combination thereof.

[0049] In an embodiment, the compositions of the present invention comprise at least one antifoaming agent which is usually employed for this purpose in agrochemical compositions. In an embodiment, the preferred antifoaming agents are selected from aqueous emulsion with polysiloxane and emulsifier; silicone oil and magnesium stearate or a suitable combination thereof.

[0050] In a preferred embodiment, the present invention provides a method of controlling broad spectrum of weeds at a locus by administering, at the locus where such weeds are growing or expected to emerge, combinations of (A) a herbicidally effective amount of clomazone; (B) a herbicidally effective amount of 2,4-D or its derivatives; and (C) a synergistically effective amount of pyrazosulfuron or its derivatives.

[0051] Therefore, in this embodiment, the present invention provides a method for controlling undesired weeds in sugarcane, said method comprising treating the locus at which said sugarcane is growing or is intended to be grown with a herbicidal combination comprising (A) a herbicidally effective amount of clomazone; (B) a herbicidally effective amount of 2,4-D or its derivatives; and (C) a synergistically effective amount of pyrazosulfuron or its derivatives.

[0052] In an embodiment, the locus may be the vicinity of any desired crop.

[0053] In a preferred embodiment, the desired crop is sugarcane.

[0054] In another preferred embodiment, the weed is selected from the group comprising nut sedge (Cyperusrotundus), flat sedge (Cyperusiria), Commelina (Commelina benghalensis), morning glories (Ipomoea spp.), Chinese sprangletop (Leptochloa chinensis) and Creeping grass (Brachiariareptans).

[0055] In another embodiment, the herbicidal combination/composition of the present invention was found especially effective against one or more of the following weeds infestations normally seen in sugarcane, such weeds include sedgesCyprus rotundus; grassesCynodondactylon, Sorghum helepense, Panicum spp., Dactyloctemiumaegyptium; broad leaved weedsChenapodium album, Convolvulus arvensis L., Amaranthusviridis L., Portulacaoleraceae L., Commmelinabengalensis L. and Trianthemaportulacastrum L. Physalis minima, Digera arvensis.

[0056] In another embodiment, the herbicidal combination/composition of the present invention was found especially effective against one or more of the following weeds, which are normally found in sugarcane, namely weeds of the genera: Echinochloa, Setaria, Panicum, Eleusine, Digitaria, Phleum, Cenchrus, Poa, Festuca, Eleusine. Brachiaria, Lolium, Bromus, Avena, Cyperus, Sorghum, Agropyron, Cynodon. Monochoria, Fimbristylis, Sagittaria, Eleocharis, Paspalum, Ischaemum, Sphenoclea, Dactyloctenium, Agrostis, Alopecurus. Apera, etc; Dicotyledonous weeds of the genera: Sinapis, Lepidium, Galium, Stellaria, Matricaria, Anthemis. Galinsoga, Commelina, Ageratum, Chenopodium, Urtica, Senecio, Euphorbia, Acanthospermum, Amaranthus, Portulaca, Ipomoea, Xanthium, Convolvulus, Ipomoea, Polygonum, Sesbania, Ambrosia, Cirsium, Carduus. Sonchus, Solanum, Rorippa, Rotala, Lindemia, Lamium, Veronica, Abutilon, Emex, Datura, Viola, Galeopsis, Papaver, Centaurea, Trifolium, Ranunculus, Taraxacum etc; Additionally, Cyperus, Scirpus, etc. among sedges are major weeds found in sugarcane.

[0057] The invention will now be explained in more detail in the following examples that illustrate, but are not intended to limit, the invention.

[0058] The invention shall now be described with reference to the following specific examples. It should be noted that the example(s) appended below illustrate rather than limit the invention, and that those skilled in the art will be able to design many alternative embodiments without departing from the scope of the present invention.

EXAMPLES

Synergy Studies

[0059] Studies were conducted to compare the weed controlling activity of the combination of Clomazone, 2,4-D and Pyrazosulfuron ethyl and compare its observed efficacy with the expected efficacy when Clomazone, 2,4-D and Pyrazosulfuron ethyl were used to treat both dicotyledonous and monocotyledonous weeds. Any difference between the observed and expected efficacy could be attributed to synergy between the compounds in the control of monocotyledonous weeds. The expected efficacy of a combination of Clomazone, 2,4-D and Pyrazosulfuron ethyl was calculated using the well-established Colby method.

[0060] In the Colby method, the expected (or predicted) response of a combination of herbicides is calculated by taking the product of the observed response for each individual component of the combination when applied alone divided by 100 and subtracting this value from the sum of the observed response for each component when applied alone. An unexpected enhancement in efficacy of the combination is then determined by comparing the observed response of the combination to the expected (or predicted) response as calculated from the observed response of each individual component alone. If the observed response of the combination is greater than the expected (or predicted) response, or stated conversely, if the difference between the observed and expected response is greater than zero, then the combination is said to be synergistic or unexpectedly effective. (Colby, S. R., Weeds, 1967(15), p. 20-22) The Colby method requires only a single dose of each herbicide applied alone and the mixture of both doses. The formula used to calculate the expected efficacy (EE) which was compared with the observed efficacy (OE) to determine the efficacy of the present invention is explained hereinbelow:

EE=(B efficacy+A efficacy(B efficacyA efficacy)/100)

[0061] The weed control activity of the individual herbicides of the invention and their combinations were evaluated on weeds such as DCA=Dactyloctenium aegyptium, EC=Echinochloa colonum, LP=Leptochloa chinensis, AV=Amaranthus viridis, TP=Trianthema portulacastrum, PO=Portulaca oleracea, PM=Physalis minima, DA=Digera arvensis; CR=Cyprus rotundas. The trial was carried out in Randomized Complete Block (RCB) method, all field trials were conducted using this method. Each trial were replicated four times and conducted under GEP guidelines. Application volumes were varied for each mixture. Such field trials were carried out at various locations so as to generate independent data, the locations were chosen randomly. Clomazone, 2,4-D and Pyrazosulfuron ethyl were sprayed according to their recommended dosage.

[0062] The following formula was used to calculate the expected activity of mixtures containing three active ingredients, A, B and C:

[00001]$\mathrm{Expected}.Math..Math.\left(E\right).Math..Math.A+B+C-\frac{\left(\mathrm{AB}+A.Math..Math.C+\mathrm{BC}\right)}{100}+\frac{\mathrm{ABC}}{10.Math.\text{,}.Math.000}$

[0063] Where [0064] A=observed efficacy of active ingredient A at the same concentration as used in the mixture. [0065] B=observed efficacy of active ingredient B at the same concentration as used in the mixture. [0066] C=observed efficacy of active ingredient C at the same concentration as used in the mixture.

[0067] The herbicide tank mix combinations, application rates, plant species tested, and results are given in the following examples:

Examples 1: Clomazone, 2,4-D and Pyrazosulfuron ethyl

[0068] Field trials were carried out to test the synergy of the combination Clomazone, 2,4-D and Pyrazosulfuron ethyl. The field trials were carried out at various locations in Bulandshahar (UP)-Agota. The percentage efficacy was calculated after 30 days of applications. The target weed was EC=Echinochloa crusgalli, LC=Leptochloa chinensis and and CR=Cyprus rotundas and the results are recorded in the table below.

TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 % Weed control EC Weed control LC Weed control Dose in sugarcane in Sugarcane Dose rate at 30DAA at 30 DAA Active g/ha Expected Actual Expected Actual Untreated 0.00 0.00 Check 2,4-D ethyl 2500 2 15 Ester 38% EC (950 g) Clomazone 2000 74 84 50% EC (1000 g) Pyrazosulfuron 375 13 38 ethyl 10% WP (37.5 g) PSE 30 g + 3000 77.83 100 91.29 100 Clomazone 730 g + 2,4-D 730 g ObservedExpected 22.17 8.71 efficacy

[0069] In the Colby method, the expected (or predicted) response of a combination of herbicides is calculated by taking the product of the observed response for each individual component of the combination when applied alone divided by 100 and subtracting this value from the sum of the observed response for each component when applied alone. An unexpected enhancement in efficacy of the combination is then determined by comparing the observed response of the combination to the expected (or predicted) response as calculated from the observed response of each individual component alone. If the observed response of the combination is greater than the expected (or predicted) response, or stated conversely, if the difference between the observed and expected response is greater than zero, then the combination is said to be synergistic or unexpectedly effective.

[0070] Thus, when the combination of the present invention was analyzed using this method, it demonstrated an observed-expected value of greater than zero which is indicative of an unexpected efficacy. The basis of demonstration of unexpected efficacy by comparison with the Colby formula is that herbicide (A) tested alone would kill a proportion of the target weeds and leave the remaining portion (a %) as survivors. Similarly, herbicide B tested alone will leave (b %) as survivors. When combined, A+B will, act independently on the target weed (if unexpected activity is absent); component A leaving a % survivors, which survivors will be controlled by component B; which has an overall effect of a %*b %*100. Subsequently, if the percent control is greater than that predicted by the Colby formula or stated conversely, if the difference between the observed control and the expected control is greater than zero; then unexpected enhancement in activity is acknowledged. The degree to which the difference is greater than zero is not itself critical as long as it is greater than zero; however greater the difference, more significant is the enhancement or the unexpectedness in weed control.

[0071] Apart from this synergistic interaction, the role of pyrazosulfuron ethyl was also evaluated using this data. Using the observed efficacies for 2,4-D ethyl and clomazone, the expected efficacy for the combination of 2,4-D ethyl and clomazone (without pyrazosulfuron ethyl) was calculated. This was then compared with the actual efficacy observed in the presence of pyrazosulfuron ethyl.

TABLE-US-00002 % Weed control EC Weed control LC Weed control Dose in sugarcane in Sugarcane Dose rate at 30DAA at 30 DAA Active g/ha Expected Actual Expected Actual Untreated 0.00 0.00 Check 2,4-D ethyl 2500 2 15 Ester 38% EC (950 g) Clomazone 2000 74 84 50% EC (1000 g) Pyrazasulfuron 375 13 38 ethyl 10% WP (37.5 g) Expected 2500 + 74.52 86.40 efficacy of 2,4- 2000 D and clomazone (without pyrazosulfuron ethyl) Actual 3000 100 100 observed efficacy of 2,4- D and clomazone with pyrazosulfuron ethyl) Difference between expected 25.48 13.60 efficacy without pyrazosulfuron ethyl and actual observed efficacy with pyrazosulfuron ethyl

[0072] It was thus found that when the combination of clomazone and 2,4-D was mixed with a reduced amount of pyrazosulfuron ethyl, the resultant combination showed improved synergistic effect, with and without added pyrazosulfuron ethyl. It was surprising that even a reduced amount of pyrazosulfuron-ethyl, which is a conventional rice herbicide, resulted in unexpectedly enhancing the efficacy of a combination of clomazone and 2,4-D, to a greater degree than expectable, for controlling undesired weeds in sugarcane.

Example 2

[0073] A second set of trials were carried out to test the synergy of the combination Clomazone, 2,4-D and Pyrazosulfuron ethyl. The field trials were carried out at various locations in Bulandshahar (UP)-Agota. The percentage efficacy was calculated after 30 days of applications. The target weed was EC=Echinochloa crusgalli, LC=Leptochloa chinensis and and CR=Cyprus rotundas and the results are recorded in the table below:

TABLE-US-00003 % Weed control EC Weed control Sedges (CR) Weed Dose in sugarcane control in Sugarcane Dose rate at 30DAA at 30 DAA Active g/ha Expected Actual Expected Actual Untreated 0.00 0.00 Check 2,4-D ethyl 2500 7 62 Ester 38% EC (950 g) Clomazone 2000 67 11 50% EC (1000 g) Pyrazosulfuron 375 25 67 ethyl 10% WP (37.5 g) PSE 30 g + 3000 76.98 93 88.83 94 Clomazone 730 g + 2,4-D 730 g ObservedExpected 16.02 5.17 efficacy

[0074] It was thus concluded by the difference in observed versus expected efficacy being greater than zero that this combination of pyrazosulfuron ethyl, clomazone and 2,4-D was synergistic.

[0075] Apart from this synergistic interaction, the role of pyrazosulfuron ethyl was also evaluated using this data. Using the observed efficacies for 2,4-D ethyl and clomazone, the expected efficacy for the combination of 2,4-D ethyl and clomazone (without pyrazosulfuron ethyl) was calculated. This was then compared with the actual efficacy observed in the presence of pyrazosulfuron ethyl.

TABLE-US-00004 % Weed control EC Weed control LC Weed control Dose in sugarcane in Sugarcane Dose rate at 30DAA at 30 DAA Active g/ha Expected Actual Expected Actual Untreated 0.00 0.00 Check 2,4-D ethyl 2500 7 62 Ester 38% EC (950 g) Clomazone 2000 67 11 50% EC (1000 g) Pyrazosulfuron 375 25 67 ethyl 10% WP (37.5 g) Expected 2500 + 69.31 66.18 efficacy of 2,4- 2000 D and clomazone (without pyrazosulfuron ethyl) Actual 3000 93 94 observed efficacy of 2,4- D and clomazone with pyrazosulfuron ethyl) Difference between expected 23.69 27.82 efficacy without pyrazosulfuron ethyl and actual observed efficacy with pyrazosulfuron ethyl

[0076] It was thus found that when the combination of clomazone and 2,4-D was mixed with a reduced amount of only up to 5% of pyrazosulfuron ethyl, the resultant combination showed improved synergistic effect, with and without added pyrazosulfuron ethyl. It was surprising that even a reduced amount of pyrazosulfuron-ethyl only up to about 5%, which is a conventional rice herbicide, resulted in unexpectedly enhancing the efficacy of a combination of clomazone and 2,4-D, to a greater degree than expectable, for controlling undesired weeds in sugarcane.

[0077] While the foregoing written description of the invention enables one of ordinary skill to make and use what is considered presently to be the best mode thereof, those of ordinary skill will understand and appreciate the existence of variations, combinations, and equivalents of the specific embodiment, method, and examples herein. The invention should therefore not be limited by the above described embodiment, method, and examples, but by all embodiments and methods within the scope and spirit of the invention.