Pesticidal composition comprising oxime carbamate and use thereof

Abstract

A liquid soluble concentrate (SL) composition is provided, the composition comprising: i) an oxime carbamate; and ii) a liquid carrier, the liquid carrier comprising a solvent system comprising an alcohol, a carbonate ester and water. A method of treating pests using the composition is also provided.

Claims

1. A liquid soluble concentrate (SL) composition comprising: i) an oxime carbamate; and ii) a liquid carrier, the liquid carrier comprising a solvent system comprising an alcohol, a carbonate ester and water, wherein the oxime carbamate is oxamyl and present in an amount ranging from 5 to 60% by weight of the composition; the alcohol is selected from methanol, ethanol, propanol, butanol, pentanol and hexanol and present in an amount ranging from 5 to 50% by weight of the composition; the carbonate ester is propylene carbonate and present in an amount ranging from 5 to 50% by weight of the composition; and the water is present in an amount ranging from 5 to 60% by weight of the composition.

2. The composition according to claim 1, wherein the oxime carbamate is present in an amount of up to 45% by weight.

3. The composition according to claim 1, wherein the oxime carbamate is present in an amount of at least 20% by weight.

4. The composition according to claim 1, wherein the composition further comprises an electrolyte.

5. The composition according to claim 4, wherein the electrolyte is an organic acid.

6. The composition according to claim 5, wherein the organic is a carboxylic acid.

7. The composition according to claim 6, wherein the carboxylic acid is selected from formic acid, acetic acid, propionoic acid, butyric acid, valeric acid, caproic acid, benzoic acid, oxalic acid, malic acid and citric acid.

8. The composition according to claim 1 wherein the composition has a pH of up to 6.5.

9. The composition according to claim 8, wherein the composition has a pH of up to 4.0.

10. The composition according to claim 9, wherein the composition has a pH ranging from 3.0 to 4.0.

11. The composition according to claim 1, wherein the liquid carrier is present in an amount of up to 80% by weight of the composition.

12. The composition according to claim 1, wherein the liquid carrier is present in an amount equal to or greater than 40% by weight of the composition.

13. The composition according to claim 1, wherein the liquid carrier is present in an amount ranging from 65 to 85% by weight of the composition.

14. The composition according to claim 1, wherein the solvent system comprises methanol or ethanol.

15. The composition according to claim 1, wherein the solvent system comprises the alcohol and the carbonate ester in a weight ratio ranging from 1:10 to 10:1.

16. The composition according to claim 1, wherein the solvent system comprises the alcohol and water in a weight ratio ranging from 1:8 to 8:1.

17. The composition according to claim 1, wherein the solvent system comprises the carbonate ester and water in a weight ratio ranging from 1:12 to 12:1.

18. The composition according to claim 1, further comprising one or more auxiliaries selected from surfactants, stabilizers, anti-foaming agents, anti-freezing agents, preservatives, antioxidants, and colorants.

19. A method for the treatment of pest infestations at a locus, the method comprising applying to the locus a composition according to claim 1.

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

EXAMPLES

Example 1

(1) A soluble concentrate (SL) formulation was prepared by mixing the following components:

(2) TABLE-US-00001 Oxamyl (97.5% TG) 43.0% Methanol 20.0% Propylene carbonate 15.0% Acetic acid 1.0% Brilliant blue FCF (Dye) 0.002% Tartrazine (Dye) 0.0002% Water to 100%

(3) The formulation had a pH of about 3.5. The formulation exhibited excellent stability.

Example 2

(4) A soluble concentrate (SL) formulation was prepared by mixing the following components:

(5) TABLE-US-00002 Oxamyl (97.5% TG) 24.6% Methanol 20.0% Propylene carbonate 9.0% Acetic acid 1.0% Brilliant blue FCF (Dye) 0.03% Tartrazine (Dye) 0.07% Water to 100%

(6) The formulation had a pH of about 3.5. The formulation exhibited excellent stability.

(7) The compositions of Examples 1 and 2 were dispersed in water to form a diluted spray medium. The spray medium was sprayed on plants at a locus.

(8) The compositions of Examples 1 and 2 were readily compatible with water and easily dispersed in water to form the spray medium. The spray medium was readily sprayed using standard spray equipment with no indication of any instability of the active components of the composition, which remained in solution.

(9) Solubility Test 1

(10) Oxamyl (40 g) was dissolved at room temperature in a range of solvent systems having the composition indicated in Table 1 below. Samples of each solution were kept at −6° C. and −18° C. for 7 days, after which the degree of crystallization or precipitation of oxamyl was observed.

(11) The results are summarised in Table 1 below.

(12) TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 1 Amount of Amount of Observations Observations Observations solvent oxamyl at room after 7 days after 7 days Solvent System (g) (g) temperature at −6° C. at −18° C. Propylene Carbonate 100 40 Oxamyl not — — completely dissolved Methanol:Water 80:20 40 Clear solution Clear solution Significant precipitation Methanol:Water 50:50 40 Clear solution Mild precipitation Significant precipitation Methanol:Water; Propylene Carbonate 75:20:5 40 Clear solution Clear solution Clear solution Methanol:Water:Propylene Carbonate 60:20:20 40 Clear solution Clear solution Clear solution Methanol:Water:Propylene Carbonate 50:40:10 40 Clear solution Clear solution Clear solution Methanol:Water:Propylene Carbonate 40:40:20 40 Clear solution Clear solution Clear solution Methanol:Water:Propylene Carbonate 30:20:50 40 Clear solution Clear solution Clear solution Methanol:Water:Propylene Carbonate 40:30:30 40 Clear solution Clear solution Clear solution

(13) As can be seen from the results in Table 1, the solvent system comprising methanol, water and propylene carbonate exhibited a significantly higher solubility for oxamyl, with no precipitation of oxamyl occurring, in particular at temperatures down to −18° C.

(14) Solubility Test 2

(15) A range of formulations were prepared having the compositions summarised in Table 2 below.

(16) The components were mixed to form a liquid soluble concentrate composition.

(17) TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 2 Meth- Proplyene Anti- Example Oxamyl anol Carbonate Water foam No. (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) 3 24 50 5 20 1 4 24 10 5 60 1 5 24 35 20 10 1 6 24 10 20 35 1 7 24 5 35 35 1 8 24 35 35 5 1 9 24 20 50 5 1 10 24 5 50 25 1 Comparative Example 1 24 50 — 25 1 Comparative Example 2 24 25 — 50 1

(18) The formulations summarised in Table 2 were prepared at room temperature and the condition of the composition was observed. Thereafter, each composition was held at −18° C. for a period of 7 days, after which the condition of the composition was again observed.

(19) The results are set out in Table 3 below.

(20) TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 3 Observations Example Observations at at −18° C. No. Room Temperature after 7 days 3 Clear solution Clear solution 4 Clear solution Clear solution 5 Clear solution Clear solution 6 Clear solution Clear solution 7 Clear solution Clear solution 8 Clear solution Clear solution 9 Clear solution Clear solution 10 Clear solution Clear solution Comparative Example 1 Clear solution Precipitation Comparative Example 2 Clear solution Precipitation

(21) From the results set out in Table 3, it can be seen that the compositions of the present invention exhibited a high degree of stability, both at room temperature and after prolonged storage at −18° C. In contrast, the formulations comprising methanol and water as the solvent system exhibited poor stability at the low temperatures, with precipitation of oxamyl occurring.

(22) Biological Tests

(23) Tomato plants were planted in a field infested with root-knot nematode (Myloidogyne incognita). The plants were planted with the roots at 5 cm from the surface of the soil. The surface of the soil was covered in a layer of a mixture of dry sandy soil and clay in a weight ratio of 1:1. Each plant was treated by drenching with 200 mL of the test formulation. At day 2 and day 5 of the test each plant was drenched with 200 mL of water.

(24) Test solutions were prepared using the formulations of each of Examples 3 to 10 and Comparative Examples 1 and 2, diluted in water to a concentration of active ingredient of 12 g/100 L and 24 g/100 L. An untreated plant was used as a control.

(25) After 30 days, the growth of the untreated control was observed to ensure the nematodes were active. After 60 days, the roots of all plants were collected and weighed. Damage to each plant was also assessed and the percentage of the plant showing signs of damage was recorded.

(26) The efficacy of the nematode control E %, for a treated plant can be defined as follows:
E=[(% of plant damage to the control−% of plant damage to the treated plant)/(% of plant damage to the control)]×100

(27) The efficacy of the nematode control for each formulation is indicated in Table 4 below.

(28) TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 4 Concentration of active Example ingredient applied Efficacy No. (g ai/100 L) (%) Control NA 0 3 12 83.2 3 24 98.8 4 12 82.1 4 24 99.2 5 12 68.3 5 24 86.4 6 12 85.1 6 24 98.5 7 12 83.7 7 24 98.4 8 12 82.5 8 24 98.8 9 12 84.2 9 24 98.9 10 12 83.6 10 24 99.2 Comparative Example 1 12 71.7 Comparative Example 1 24 85.2 Comparative Example 2 12 73.6 Comparative Example 2 24 84.9

(29) The results set out in Table 4 show that compositions according to the present invention, employed a solvent system comprising methanol, water and propylene carbonate, exhibited significantly greater control of the nematode infestation and significantly reduced plant damage, compared with the comparative formulations.

(30) The weight of the root material of each plant was recorded. The results are set out in Table 5 below. A higher root weight indicates the formation of root nematodes and a higher degree of activity of the nematode infestation.

(31) TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 5 Concentration of active Example ingredient applied Root Weight No. (g ai/100 L) (g) Control NA 12.52 3 12 9.37 3 24 8.82 4 12 9.34 4 24 8.95 5 12 9.44 5 24 8.88 6 12 9.38 6 24 8.90 7 12 9.51 7 24 8.83 8 12 9.27 8 24 8.91 9 12 9.39 9 24 8.82 10 12 9.47 10 24 8.67 Comparative Example 1 12 12.10 Comparative Example 1 24 11.52 Comparative Example 2 12 12.02 Comparative Example 2 24 11.44

(32) The results set out in Table 5 above indicate that the treatment of the plants with compositions of the present invention resulted in a lower root mass, indicating a significant reduction in the formation of root knots compared with the untreated control, in turn indicating a greater control of the nematode infestation, compared with the formulations of the comparative examples.