Plant quarantine composition for treating cryptoflower diseases affecting plants

Abstract

The present invention relates to a plant quarantine composition comprising (i) one or more metal sources, (ii) one or more sugars and / or one or more sugar derivatives, and (iii) one or more phosphorous derivatives.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to phytosanitary compositions comprising (i) one or more metal sources, (ii) one or more sugars and / or one or more sugar derivatives, and (iii) one or more phosphorus derivatives. The compositions according to the invention are particularly useful as fungicides. More particularly, another object of the invention relates to the treatment of downy mildew on grapevines by applying the phytosanitary compositions according to the invention. Background Technology

[0002] This invention relates to phytosanitary compositions used as fungicides for the preventive and / or curative treatment of cryptogamic diseases such as downy mildew.

[0003] Downy mildew is a general term for a class of cryptogamic diseases of plants, especially those affecting grapevines and potatoes. It is caused by tiny parasitic organisms classified as belonging to the phylum Oomycetes in the kingdom Pseudomycetes.

[0004] The use of plant-based medicinal products, particularly those based on mineral salts, oxides or hydroxides, and copper sulfate, has long been known, especially for their antifungal properties, such as their use against downy mildew in grapevines. These products also possess fungicidal abilities, such as resistance to bacterial necrosis in peach or apricot trees, or Pseudomonas bacterial diseases in apple or pear trees, or have antibacterial properties that prevent the establishment of bacterial diseases.

[0005] Specifically, in viticulture, for example, the common means of preventing or controlling downy mildew is copper-based products, such as copper sulfate, copper hydroxide, copper oxychloride, cuprous oxide, and phosphonates or phosphites, often referred to as the Bordeaux mixture. However, these products have limited efficacy, and more importantly, copper is a potent biocide that can lead to soil sterilization. Therefore, regulations, particularly European regulations, limit copper use to 28 kg / ha over 7 years, or an average dose of metallic copper of 4 kg / ha / year.

[0006] It should be noted that the maximum copper levels authorized by these regulations must also take into account the amount of copper contained in certain foliar fertilizers.

[0007] Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop new, effective, and environmentally friendly plant quarantine compositions for treating cultivated plants such as grapevines.

[0008] Surprisingly, the following combinations have been found to be effective in preventing and / or treating downy mildew on cultivated plants such as grapevines, while exhibiting good biocompatibility: (i) one or more metal oxides, (ii) one or more sugars and / or one or more sugar derivatives, and (iii) one or more phosphorus derivatives. It should also be noted that formulations of such combinations, as well as their phytosanitary formulations, must be chemically and physically stable during storage and use.

[0009] Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop new, effective, chemically stable and / or physically stable plant quarantine compositions that are biocompatible and environmentally friendly for the treatment of cultivated plants. Summary of the Invention

[0010] The first object of the present invention relates to a plant quarantine composition comprising:

[0011] (i) One or more metal sources selected from the following:

[0012] a. Metal oxides,

[0013] b. Metal complexes, and / or

[0014] c. Metal salts

[0015] (ii) One or more sugars and / or one or more sugar derivatives selected from the group consisting of: gluconic acid, fructose acid, glucuronic acid, galactonic acid, galacturonic acid, optionally in salt form, and

[0016] (iii) One or more phosphorus derivatives selected from the group consisting of phosphorous acid and phosphites.

[0017] A second object of the present invention relates to a method for preparing a plant quarantine composition according to the invention, comprising the step of mixing the following:

[0018] (i) One or more metal sources selected from the following:

[0019] a. Metal oxides,

[0020] b. Metal complexes, and / or

[0021] c. Metal salts

[0022] (ii) One or more sugars and / or one or more sugar derivatives selected from the group consisting of: gluconic acid, fructose acid, glucuronic acid, galacturonic acid, and galacturonic acid; and

[0023] (iii) One or more phosphorus derivatives selected from the group consisting of phosphorous acid and phosphites.

[0024] A third object of the invention relates to the use of the plant quarantine composition according to the invention in the preventive and / or curative treatment of cultivated plants that may be affected by cryptogamic diseases caused by fungi and / or oomycetes, optionally the plant quarantine composition according to the invention being prepared by the preparation method according to the invention.

[0025] A fourth object of the present invention relates to a method for the preventive and / or curative treatment of cryptogamy caused by fungi and / or oomycetes in cultivated plants, comprising the step of applying a phytosanitary composition according to the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0026] For the purposes of this invention, the various embodiments presented throughout the specification can be used individually or in combination with each other, and the combinations are not limited.

[0027] Therefore, the present invention relates to a plant quarantine composition comprising:

[0028] (i) One or more metal sources selected from the following:

[0029] a. Metal oxides,

[0030] b. Metal complexes, and / or

[0031] c. Metal salts

[0032] (ii) One or more sugars and / or one or more sugar derivatives selected from the group consisting of: gluconic acid, fructose acid, glucuronic acid, galactonic acid, galacturonic acid, optionally in salt form, and

[0033] (iii) One or more phosphorus derivatives selected from the group consisting of phosphorous acid and phosphites.

[0034] If the composition contains multiple metal sources, the metals from different sources may be the same as or different from the metals from other sources.

[0035] The metal may be selected from zinc, copper, iron, manganese and aluminum, preferably zinc and copper, and more preferably zinc.

[0036] One or more sugars may be selected from the group consisting of fructose, glucose, lactose, galactose, maltose, or sucrose, optionally in the form of a salt. Generally, a salt refers to a glucose salt, lactose salt, galactose salt, maltose salt, and / or sucrose salt.

[0037] The term "sugar derivative" refers to a compound obtained through the chemical modification of a sugar. For example, gluconic acid is obtained by oxidizing glucose to an acid. One or more sugar derivatives are selected from the group consisting of fructose, gluconic acid, glucuronic acid, galactonic acid, and galacturonic acid, optionally in the form of salts. Generally, salts refer to fructose salts, glucose salts, glucuronic acid salts, galactose salts, and galacturonic acid salts.

[0038] According to the first alternative, one or more metal sources are oxides or metal oxides of one or more metals, and the phytosanitary composition comprises:

[0039] (i) one or more metal oxides,

[0040] (ii) one or more sugars and / or one or more sugar derivatives, optionally in the form of salts, and

[0041] (iii) One or more phosphorus derivatives.

[0042] One or more metal oxides may be selected from the group consisting of zinc oxide, iron oxide, manganese oxide, aluminum oxide, or copper oxide. Preferably, one or more metal oxides may be selected from the group consisting of zinc oxide, iron oxide, and manganese oxide. More preferably, when the metal source is a metal oxide, the metal oxide is zinc oxide.

[0043] According to certain implementations, the phytosanitary composition may contain:

[0044] - One or more metal sources selected from metal oxides, wherein the metal oxides are selected from: zinc oxide, copper oxide, iron oxide, manganese oxide, aluminum oxide, preferably zinc oxide;

[0045] - One or more sugar derivatives, preferably gluconic acid, and

[0046] - One or more phosphorus derivatives, preferably phosphorous acid or potassium phosphite.

[0047] According to the second alternative, one or more metal sources are one or more metal compounds.

[0048] The complex may be selected from complexes with at least one sugar derivative or ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) as described below. In one embodiment, the complex is selected from complexes of a metal, preferably zinc, as described below, and is selected from complexes of said metal with EDTA.

[0049] According to the third alternative, one or more metal sources are one or more metal salts. The metal salts may be selected from salts of sugar derivatives, as described above, preferably gluconates; and sulfates, chlorides, carbonates, and nitrates of the metal.

[0050] The salt can be selected from the group consisting of sodium salts, zinc salts, calcium salts, silicon salts, potassium salts, manganese salts, magnesium salts, copper salts, or mixtures thereof. In one specific embodiment, the salt is selected from zinc salts and copper salts, preferably zinc salts. For example, the gluconate can be selected from the group consisting of sodium gluconate, zinc gluconate, calcium gluconate, silicon gluconate, potassium gluconate, manganese gluconate, magnesium gluconate, copper gluconate, or mixtures thereof. Preferably, the sugar derivative in salt form is a zinc salt. In particular, the sugar derivative in salt form is zinc gluconate.

[0051] In some implementations, the phytosanitary composition does not contain salts of copper citrate, copper monogluconate, copper monogalacturonate, or copper sulfate.

[0052] According to certain embodiments, one or more metal sources as defined in any of the above embodiments provide up to 40 g / L of metal, preferably 1-27 g / L, preferably zinc. In one embodiment, one or more metal sources preferably provide 1.5-5 g / L of zinc in the composition. In another embodiment, one or more metal sources preferably provide 20-27 g / L of zinc in the composition. In yet another embodiment, one or more metal sources preferably provide 29-38 g / L of zinc in the composition. The metal content can be determined by any analytical method known to those skilled in the art, such as inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES). In the latter case, the wavelength can be 260.2 nm to detect zinc.

[0053] One or more phosphorus derivatives are selected from the group consisting of: phosphorous acid (H3PO3) (also known as phosphonic acid (H3PO3)), phosphites (also known as phosphonates), or mixtures thereof. Phosphites refer to sodium phosphite (or sodium phosphonate), zinc phosphite (or zinc phosphonate), calcium phosphite (or calcium phosphonate), silicon phosphite (or silicon phosphonate), potassium phosphite (or potassium phosphonate), manganese phosphite (or manganese phosphonate), magnesium phosphite (or magnesium phosphonate), or mixtures thereof. In one embodiment, one or more phosphorus derivatives are selected from: phosphorous acid (H3PO3), potassium phosphite, or mixtures thereof.

[0054] Phosphorous acid is a diacid. In the context of this invention, the term "phosphite" refers to its first conjugate base, H₂PO₃. - It also refers to its second conjugate base HPO3 2- The salt. Preferably, "phosphite" corresponds to the salt of its second conjugate base. It is well known to those skilled in the art that, in aqueous solutions, an acid and its conjugate base coexist at different concentrations depending on the pKa of the acid / base pair and the pH of the solution.

[0055] Unrestricted by any theory, the combination of a metal source (such as zinc oxide) with a sugar derivative (such as gluconic acid) and a phosphorus derivative results in the formation of one or more active substances, such as zinc gluconate and / or zinc phosphite.

[0056] Advantageously, the phytosanitary compositions according to the invention exhibit improved phytosanitary efficiency in reducing and / or eliminating infection of plants by one or more fungi and / or oomycetes, and demonstrate better performance in terms of biocompatibility and environmental friendliness. In particular, the phytosanitary compositions according to the invention do not possess biocidal activity, which allows for limiting environmental impact and protecting cultivated soils. Another advantage of the phytosanitary compositions according to the invention is that they effectively stimulate the natural defenses of the treated plants. Advantageously, the compositions according to the invention combine the active ingredients while maintaining their chemical and physical stability, ensuring stability during storage and use.

[0057] Phytosanitary compositions may contain:

[0058] (i) One or more metal sources with a mass fraction of 1% to 40%, as described in any of the above embodiments;

[0059] (ii) one or more sugar derivatives with a mass fraction of 5% to 50%; and

[0060] (iii) One or more phosphorus derivatives in a mass fraction of 35% to 80%, the mass fraction being given based on the mass of the dried composition.

[0061] Generally, phytosanitary compositions can be liquid or dry. In particular, when the composition is liquid, it further contains water. Generally, liquid phytosanitary compositions are solutions. In some embodiments, the phytosanitary composition contains 10% to 50% water by mass, based on the total mass of the composition.

[0062] According to certain embodiments, when the metal source is an oxide of one or more metals (metal oxide), the phytosanitary composition may contain:

[0063] - One or more metal oxides selected from the following: zinc oxide, copper oxide, iron oxide, manganese oxide, aluminum oxide, preferably zinc oxide;

[0064] -gluconic acid, and

[0065] - Phosphorous acid or potassium phosphite.

[0066] It may include:

[0067] - One or more metal sources selected from metal oxides, with a mass fraction of 2% to 25%, wherein the metal oxides are selected from: zinc oxide, copper oxide, iron oxide, manganese oxide, aluminum oxide, preferably zinc oxide;

[0068] - One or more sugar derivatives, preferably gluconic acid, in a mass fraction of 10% to 50%, and

[0069] - One or more phosphorus derivatives, preferably phosphorous acid or potassium phosphite, in a mass fraction of 35% to 80%.

[0070] The mass fraction is given based on the mass of the dried composition.

[0071] In a particular embodiment, the phytosanitary composition may comprise:

[0072] (i) One or more metal oxides, preferably zinc oxide, in a mass fraction of 10% to 25%;

[0073] (ii) one or more sugars and / or sugar derivatives, preferably gluconic acid, in a mass fraction of 30% to 50%; and

[0074] (iii) One or more phosphorous derivatives with a mass fraction of 35% to 55%, preferably phosphorous acid;

[0075] The mass fraction is given based on the mass of the dried composition.

[0076] Preferably, according to this particular embodiment, the phytosanitary composition may comprise:

[0077] (i) One or more metal oxides, preferably zinc oxide, in a mass fraction of 14% to 22%;

[0078] (ii) one or more sugars and / or sugar derivatives, preferably gluconic acid, in a mass fraction of 35% to 45%; and

[0079] (iii) One or more phosphorus derivatives with a mass fraction of 38% to 48%, preferably phosphorous acid;

[0080] The mass fraction is given based on the mass of the dried composition.

[0081] In an exemplary embodiment, the phytosanitary composition comprises

[0082] (i) One or more metal oxides, such as zinc oxide, having a mass fraction of 18%;

[0083] (ii) One or more sugars and / or sugar derivatives, such as gluconic acid or gluconate such as zinc gluconate, at a mass fraction of 39%; and

[0084] (iii) One or more phosphorous derivatives, such as phosphorous acid, having a mass fraction of 43%;

[0085] The mass fraction is given based on the mass of the dried composition.

[0086] When the content is expressed based on the total mass of the composition, the phytosanitary composition may contain:

[0087] (i) One or more metal oxides with a mass fraction of 5% to 15%;

[0088] (ii) One or more sugars and / or sugar derivatives with a mass fraction of 20% to 30%;

[0089] (ii) one or more phosphorus derivatives in a mass fraction of 20% to 30%; and

[0090] (iv) Water with a mass fraction of 30% to 50%;

[0091] The mass fraction is given based on the total mass of the composition.

[0092] In one embodiment, the phytosanitary composition may comprise:

[0093] (i) One or more metal oxides with a mass fraction of 8% to 12%;

[0094] (ii) One or more sugar derivatives and / or sugar derivatives with a mass fraction of 22% to 26%;

[0095] (ii) one or more phosphorus derivatives in a mass fraction of 24% to 28%, and

[0096] (iv) Water with a mass fraction of 35% to 45%;

[0097] The mass fraction is given based on the total mass of the composition.

[0098] In another preferred embodiment, the phytosanitary composition comprises:

[0099] (i) One or more metal oxides, such as zinc oxide, having a mass fraction of 11%;

[0100] (ii) one or more sugars and / or sugar derivatives, such as gluconic acid or gluconate, at a mass fraction of 24%; and

[0101] (iii) One or more phosphorous derivatives, such as phosphorous acid, having a mass fraction of 26%;

[0102] (iv) Water with a mass fraction of 39%;

[0103] The mass fraction is given based on the total mass of the composition.

[0104] In a second specific embodiment, the phytosanitary composition may comprise:

[0105] (i) One or more metal oxides, preferably zinc oxide, in a mass fraction of 2% to 10%, preferably 3% to 6%, typically about 4%;

[0106] (ii) one or more sugar derivatives, preferably gluconic acid, in a mass fraction of 5% to 25%, preferably 10% to 20%, typically about 17%; and

[0107] (iii) One or more phosphorus derivatives, preferably potassium phosphite, having a mass fraction of 60% to 80%, preferably 64% to 75%, typically about 68%;

[0108] The mass fraction is given based on the mass of the dried composition.

[0109] In a third specific embodiment, the phytosanitary composition may comprise:

[0110] (i) One or more metal oxides, preferably zinc oxide, in a mass fraction of 1% to 5%, preferably 3% to 5%, typically about 4%;

[0111] (ii) one or more sugar derivatives, preferably gluconic acid, in a mass fraction of 20% to 40%, preferably 30% to 35%, typically about 31%; and

[0112] (iii) One or more phosphorus derivatives, preferably potassium phosphite, having a mass fraction of 40% to 60%, preferably 45% to 55%, typically about 50%;

[0113] The mass fraction is given based on the mass of the dried composition.

[0114] Phytosanitary compositions may further comprise an algae base, which can be used as a carrier. "Algae base" refers to marine algae, cultured algae, algae powder, or one of their extracts or blends extracted from these algae, such as kelp polysaccharides, or any other type of equivalent carrier. The algae base may constitute 0 to 10% by mass in the composition, typically 0.1% to 10% by mass.

[0115] Phytosanitary compositions may also contain any other ingredients useful in their preparation. These ingredients may be selected from thickeners such as xanthan gum, surfactants, preservatives, dispersants, wetting agents, emulsifiers, colorants, or cosolvents such as propylene glycol.

[0116] According to certain embodiments, when the metal source is one or more metal complexes, the phytosanitary composition may contain:

[0117] - Selected from one or more of the following metal complexes: zinc complex, copper complex, iron complex, manganese complex, aluminum complex, preferably zinc complex, especially zinc-EDTA complex;

[0118] - One or more sugar derivatives, preferably gluconic acid, and

[0119] - One or more phosphorus derivatives, preferably potassium phosphite.

[0120] For example, the composition may contain one or more metal sources selected from metal complexes, said metal complexes being selected from complexes with EDTA, preferably zinc with EDTA, complexes with gluconic acid, and complexes with potassium phosphite.

[0121] Specifically, the composition may comprise:

[0122] - One or more metal sources selected from metal complexes, with a mass fraction of 20% to 40%, wherein the metal complexes are selected from complexes with EDTA, preferably complexes of zinc and EDTA;

[0123] - Gluconic acid with a mass fraction of 5% to 25%, and

[0124] - Potassium phosphite with a mass fraction of 55% to 80%,

[0125] The mass fraction is given based on the mass of the dried composition.

[0126] According to certain embodiments, the composition comprises:

[0127] - One or more metal sources selected from metal complexes, with a mass fraction of 20% to 30%, wherein the metal complexes are selected from complexes with EDTA, preferably complexes of zinc and EDTA;

[0128] - Gluconic acid with a mass fraction of 5% to 15%, and

[0129] - Potassium phosphite with a mass fraction of 60% to 70%,

[0130] The mass fraction is given based on the mass of the dried composition.

[0131] According to certain specific embodiments, the composition comprises:

[0132] - A zinc-EDTA complex with a mass fraction of 20% to 30%, preferably 20% to 27%, for example, about 21% to about 26%;

[0133] - A mass fraction of 6% to 12%, for example, about 10% or about 6% gluconic acid; and

[0134] - Potassium phosphite with a mass fraction of 65% to 70%, for example, about 67% or 68%.

[0135] The mass fraction is given based on the mass of the dried composition.

[0136] Typically, based on the total mass of the composition, the sum of the mass fractions of the components in the above composition is 100%.

[0137] When the metal source is one or more metal oxides, particularly zinc oxide, the pH of the phytosanitary composition can be less than or equal to 6.5, preferably between 1.5 and 6, typically between 1.5 and 3.0, or between 4.5 and 5.5. In some embodiments, the formulation further comprises at least one pH adjuster selected from acids, bases, or buffers, such as hydrochloric acid, nitric acid, phosphoric acid, maleic acid, lactic acid, potassium hydroxide, or ethanolamine. In one exemplary embodiment, when the metal source is one or more metal oxides, particularly zinc oxide, the phytosanitary composition may further comprise hydrochloric acid, typically present in an amount of 5% to 20% by mass, the mass fraction given based on the mass of the dried composition.

[0138] When the metal source is one or more metal complexes, particularly EDTA zinc, the pH of the phytosanitary composition can be greater than or equal to 4, typically between 5 and 7, and typically between 5 and 6.

[0139] The density of the phytosanitary composition may be less than or equal to 2.5, typically less than or equal to 2, or even less than or equal to 1.5, for example 1.4 or 1.3.

[0140] Phytosanitary compositions may have one or more metal sources at concentrations of 5 to 300 g / L. When the metal source is one or more metal oxides, particularly zinc oxide, the phytosanitary composition may contain 5 to 190 g / L of said one or more metal oxides, such as zinc oxide. Phytosanitary compositions may have concentrations of one or more metal oxides (e.g., zinc oxide) of 90 to 190 g / L, typically 100 to 180 g / L or 110 to 170 g / L, for example 168 g / L. According to some embodiments, the phytosanitary composition may also have concentrations of one or more metal sources, such as one or more metal oxides, typically zinc oxide, of 5 to 150 g / L, typically 10 to 100 g / L, 15 to 70 g / L or 20 to 50 g / L, for example 30 g / L. When the metal source is one or more metal complexes, particularly EDTA zinc, the phytosanitary composition may also have one or more metal sources at concentrations of 100 to 300 g / L, typically 130 to 290 g / L, 160 to 260 g / L, for example about 200 or 150 g / L.

[0141] The phytosanitary composition may have one or more sugars and / or one or more sugar derivatives (e.g., gluconic acid and / or gluconate) at concentrations of 110 to 250 g / L, typically 120 to 230 g / L or 130 to 200 g / L, preferably 140 to 180 g / L. According to some embodiments, the phytosanitary composition may also have one or more sugars and / or one or more sugar derivatives, such as gluconic acid and / or gluconate, at concentrations of 80 to 180 g / L, typically 90 to 170 g / L and preferably 100 to 160 g / L, typically about 120 or 150 g / L. According to other embodiments, the phytosanitary composition may also have one or more sugars and / or one or more sugar derivatives, such as gluconic acid and / or gluconate, at concentrations of 300 to 600 g / L, typically 400 to 550 g / L, preferably 450 to 520 g / L, typically about 490 g / L.

[0142] The phytosanitary composition may have one or more phosphorus derivatives (e.g., phosphorous acid) at a concentration of 180 to 1100 g / L. For example, the phytosanitary composition may have one or more phosphorus derivatives (e.g., phosphorous acid) at concentrations of 180 to 280 g / L, typically 200 to 260 g / L or 220 to 240 g / L, and preferably 225 to 235 g / L, such as 231 g / L. According to some embodiments, the phytosanitary composition may also have one or more phosphorus derivatives (e.g., potassium phosphite) at concentrations of 280 to 600 g / L, typically 350 to 560 g / L or 400 to 540 g / L, and preferably 450 to 520 g / L, such as 490 g / L. According to other embodiments, the phytosanitary composition may also have one or more phosphorus derivatives (e.g., potassium phosphite) at concentrations of 600 g / L to 1300 g / L, typically 650 g / L to 750 g / L or 1000 g / L to 1200 g / L, such as 690 g / L or 1100 g / L.

[0143] In one embodiment, the phytosanitary composition has one or more of the following concentrations:

[0144] (i) 90 g / L to 190 g / L, typically 100 g / L to 180 g / L or 110 g / L to 170 g / L of metal oxides, such as zinc oxide; and / or

[0145] (ii) 180 g / L to 280 g / L, typically 200 g / L to 260 g / L or 220 g / L to 240 g / L and preferably 225 g / L to 235 g / L of sugars and / or sugar derivatives, such as gluconic acid or gluconate; and / or

[0146] (iii) 180 g / L to 280 g / L, typically 200 g / L to 260 g / L or 220 g / L to 240 g / L and preferably 225 g / L to 235 g / L of phosphorous derivatives, such as phosphorous acid.

[0147] In one embodiment, the phytosanitary composition has one or more of the following concentrations:

[0148] (i) one or more metal sources, such as one or more metal oxides, such as zinc oxide, at concentrations of 5 to 150 g / L, typically 10 to 100 g / L, 15 to 70 g / L, or 20 to 50 g / L, for example 30 g / L; and / or

[0149] (ii) 80 to 150 g / L, typically 90 to 140 g / L, and preferably 105 to 135 g / L, typically about 120 g / L of sugars and / or sugar derivatives, such as gluconic acid or gluconate; and / or

[0150] (iii) 280 to 600 g / L, typically 350 to 560 g / L or 400 to 540 g / L, and preferably 450 to 520 g / L and, for example, 490 g / L of phosphorous derivatives, such as phosphorous acid or potassium phosphite.

[0151] In one embodiment, the phytosanitary composition has one or more of the following concentrations:

[0152] (i) 100 to 300 g / L, typically 130 to 290 g / L, 160 to 260 g / L, and, for example, about 200 or 150 g / L of one or more metal compounds, particularly zinc EDTA; and / or

[0153] (ii) 80 to 180 g / L, typically 90 to 170 g / L, and preferably 100 to 160 g / L, typically about 120 or 150 g / L of sugars and / or sugar derivatives, such as gluconic acid or gluconate; and / or

[0154] (iii) 600 g / L to 1300 g / L, typically 1000 g / L to 1200 g / L, and one or more phosphorus derivatives, such as potassium phosphite, at a concentration of, for example, 1100 g / L.

[0155] In one embodiment, the phytosanitary composition has one or more of the following concentrations:

[0156] (i) one or more metal sources, such as one or more metal oxides, such as zinc oxide, at concentrations of 5 to 150 g / L, typically 10 to 100 g / L, 15 to 70 g / L, or 20 to 50 g / L, for example 30 g / L; and / or

[0157] (ii) 300 to 600 g / L, typically 400 to 550 g / L, and preferably 450 to 520 g / L, typically about 490 g / L, of sugars and / or sugar derivatives, such as gluconic acid or gluconate; and / or

[0158] (iii) One or more phosphorus derivatives, such as potassium phosphite, of 600 to 1300 g / L, typically 650 to 750 g / L, for example 690 g / L.

[0159] Preparation method

[0160] Another aspect of the present invention relates to a method for preparing the plant quarantine composition as described above.

[0161] In one embodiment, a method for preparing a plant quarantine composition includes the step of mixing the following:

[0162] (i) One or more metal sources as defined above.

[0163] (ii) one or more sugars and / or one or more sugar derivatives; and

[0164] (iii) One or more phosphorus derivatives.

[0165] In one embodiment, a method for preparing a plant quarantine composition includes the step of mixing the following:

[0166] (i) one or more metal oxides,

[0167] (ii) one or more sugars and / or one or more sugar derivatives; and

[0168] (iii) One or more phosphorus derivatives.

[0169] Depending on the adjustment of each component, the resulting composition can be either dry or liquid.

[0170] More specifically, the method for preparing the composition (typically a liquid) includes the following steps:

[0171] (a) Adding one or more metal oxides, one or more sugars and / or one or more sugar derivatives and one or more phosphorus derivatives to water;

[0172] (b) Heat at a temperature of 40 to 80 °C for at least 2 hours;

[0173] (c) Cool to a temperature of 15 to 25 °C.

[0174] Preferably, step (a) is carried out by adding, preferably in this order, one or more metal oxides, one or more sugars and / or one or more sugar derivatives, followed by one or more phosphorus derivatives.

[0175] An alternative method for preparing the composition (typically a liquid) includes the following steps:

[0176] (a') Adding to water: one or more metal sources, typically metal salts such as zinc oxide, and one or more sugars and / or one or more sugar derivatives, typically gluconic acid,

[0177] (a'') Add one or more phosphorous derivatives, such as phosphorous acid or potassium phosphite, to the mixture from the previous step, or

[0178] (a') Adding to water: one or more phosphorous derivatives, such as phosphorous acid or potassium phosphite, and one or more metal sources, typically metal salts, such as zinc oxide.

[0179] (a'') Add one or more sugars and / or one or more sugar derivatives, typically gluconic acid, to the mixture in the previous step.

[0180] Optionally, steps (b) and / or (c).

[0181] In this alternative, steps (b) and / or (c) may be performed between steps (a') and (a'') or after step (a'').

[0182] Typically, the addition to the water is carried out with stirring (a). This also applies to steps (a') and (a'').

[0183] Heating step (b) can be carried out for at least 2 hours, typically at least 4 hours, or even 2 to 6 hours. The temperature in step (b) can vary between 50 and 70 °C.

[0184] The heating in step (b) can be performed by any method known to those skilled in the art.

[0185] The cooling in step (c) can be performed by any method known to those skilled in the art. Generally, cooling is performed by stopping the heating in step (b) until the ambient temperature is reached (e.g., 15°C to 25°C depending on the season).

[0186] When the phytosanitary composition further comprises an algal matrix such as kelp polysaccharide and / or any other ingredients useful in its formulation, it may be added in one of the following steps: (a), (a)', (a''), (b) and / or (c), typically (a), (b) and / or (c). Typically, these additions are made under stirring. Each of these ingredients may be added individually or in the form of a mixture of these ingredients that can be used in the formulation, for example, in the form of an aqueous solution.

[0187] The phytosanitary composition thus prepared can be stored at room temperature as usual before use.

[0188] In some embodiments, the phytosanitary composition is obtained according to the preparation method described above.

[0189] use

[0190] Another aspect of the invention relates to the use of the plant quarantine composition described above for preventive and / or curative treatment of cultivated plants that may be affected by downy mildew-type cryptogamy.

[0191] Cryptocoryne diseases are caused by fungi and / or oomycetes. Generally, the fungi and / or oomycetes are selected from the following group: *Plasmopara viticola*, *Phytophthora infestans*, *Phytophthora ramorum*, *Phytophthora cinnamomi*, *Phytophthora capsici*, *Pseudoperonospora cubensis*, *Bremia lactucae*, *Peronospora destructor*, *Venturiainaequalis*, *Venturia carpophila*, *Venturia pyrina*, *Spilocaea oleaginea*, and *Guignardia bidwellii*.

[0192] More specifically, the cultivable plants that can be treated are selected from the group consisting of: grapevines, commercial vegetable cultivations, certain large-scale cultivations, and fruit tree cultivations. Fruit trees include, for example, citrus fruits, pineapples, kiwis, olive trees, banana trees, stone fruits such as peaches, nectarines, and apricots, or pome fruits such as apples and pears. Commercial vegetable cultivations include, for example, potatoes, beets, tomatoes, onions, garlic, bell peppers, eggplants, celery, spinach, melons, leeks, lettuce, romaine lettuce, watercress, or aromatic plants. Large-scale cultivations that can be treated are, for example, sugar beet cultivations. Preferably, the cultivable plant that can be treated is a grapevine.

[0193] Treatment using the plant quarantine composition according to the invention can be carried out by spraying, typically by foliar application.

[0194] Treatment using the plant quarantine composition according to the invention can be carried out by applying the composition to the leaves and / or fruit of the plant or any other area of ​​the plant that requires treatment.

[0195] Advantageously, preventative treatment using the phytosanitary composition according to the invention is carried out before the onset of downy mildew-type cryptogamy.

[0196] Once downy mildew-type syconia occurs, it can be treated immediately with the phytosanitary composition according to the present invention.

[0197] Advantageously, the phytosanitary composition according to the invention allows for the prevention and / or reduction and / or elimination of fungal and / or oomycete infections.

[0198] The phytosanitary composition according to the invention can be applied at a dose of 1 to 7 L / ha, preferably 4 to 6 L / ha.

[0199] Optionally, the phytosanitary composition according to the invention requires no additional processing before use. In particular, the concentrations of the components in the phytosanitary composition are suitable for direct use without the need for, for example, additional dilution steps. The phytosanitary composition according to the invention, referred to as a "ready-to-use" phytosanitary composition, is typically intended for small-area treatment and is typically used by horticultural enthusiasts or commercial vegetable growers.

[0200] Optionally, the phytosanitary compositions according to the invention require a dissolving and / or dilution step before use. In particular, for specialized applications aimed at treating large-scale cultivated areas, the phytosanitary compositions typically have higher concentrations of components (i), (ii), and (iii) compared to "ready-to-use" compositions. In this case, the phytosanitary compositions need to be dissolved and / or diluted, for example, after being introduced into a spray can and then the can is filled with water.

[0201] In particular, the present invention relates to the use of the phytosanitary composition described above for the preventive and / or curative treatment of downy mildew-type cryptogamy.

[0202] Preventative and / or curative treatments for cultivated plants include application, for example by spraying, of a phytosanitary composition at a mass fraction of at least 1%, preferably at least 2%, preferably 2% to 5%, or 2.5% to 4.5% of the phytosanitary composition described above. Application may be repeated every 6 to 14 days.

[0203] According to one embodiment, the application of the phytosanitary composition can be repeated 2 to 10 times, typically 4 to 8 times or 6 to 7 times. When the phytosanitary composition is applied repeatedly, each application can be spaced 1 to 30 days from the next application, typically 2 to 15 days, for example 7 days.

[0204] According to one embodiment, depending on the cultivated plant being treated, the application of the phytosanitary composition may last for 1 to 8 months, typically 2 to 6 months, and conventionally longer than 3, 4, or 5 months. For example, for lettuce cultivation, the application may last for 4 months, while for grapevine cultivation, it may last for 5 months.

[0205] According to one embodiment, the phytosanitary composition is applied 0.2 to 2 times per week, typically 0.5 to 1 time per week. Those skilled in the art can adjust the application frequency according to climatic conditions, typically by extending the time interval between sprays in the absence of rain.

[0206] According to one implementation, the phytosanitary composition is applied once the first damage from the syringe disease appears on the cultivation plant.

[0207] According to another embodiment, the phytosanitary composition is applied preventively before the first damage from the syringe disease occurs on the cultivation plant, for example, in the case of fruit cultivation plants, when climatic conditions tend to cause the syringe disease to occur on the cultivation plant or during the presence of fruit.

[0208] In one implementation, treating or preventing cryptogamy in cultivated plants includes reducing and / or eliminating damage caused by fungi and / or oomycetes that cause said cryptogamy.

[0209] The present invention also relates to a method for curative and / or preventative treatment of syconia (typically downy mildew-type syconia), the method comprising the step of applying a composition as defined above to cultivated plants. Attached Figure Description

[0210] Figure 1 : is a plan view of the experimental device used in the embodiment.

[0211] Figure 2 : Defines the experimental protocol for the experiment in this embodiment. The letter C corresponds to the contamination conducted on May 4, 2022. Abbreviations F1, F2, G1, G2, and G3 correspond to the scores given to leaves or ears of fruit, respectively. Abbreviations T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, and T7 correspond to treatment numbers. The dates for these events (contamination, scoring, treatment) are shown in the timeline above.

[0212] Figure 3 This is a chart showing the evolution of downy mildew symptoms in the untreated control group.

[0213] Figure 4 This is a chart showing the evolution of downy mildew symptoms on ears in the untreated control group.

[0214] Figure 5 This is a climatological graph showing the test site from April 15 to July 15, 2022. On this graph, the curves correspond to the changes in maximum temperature (TMAX), average temperature (TAVG), and minimum temperature (TMIN). The bars on the horizontal axis represent precipitation (marked as rain) and the volume of liquid provided by sprinkler treatment (marked as spray).

[0215] Figure 6 This is a chart showing the efficiency (relative value) on the leaves as of May 30, 2022.

[0216] Figure 7 This is a chart showing leaf efficiency (relative value) as of June 16, 2022.

[0217] Figure 8 This is a chart showing the efficiency (relative value) on the ear of fruit as of June 9, 2022.

[0218] Figure 9 This is a chart showing the efficiency (relative value) on the ear of fruit as of June 22, 2022.

[0219] Figure 10 This is a chart showing the efficiency (relative value) on the ear of fruit as of July 7, 2022.

[0220] Figure 11 : This is a chart representing the average incidence rate in D+3 tobacco plants.

[0221] Figure 12 : This is a chart representing the average severity (relative value) of D+3 tobacco plants.

[0222] Example

[0223] The following examples illustrate specific embodiments of the present invention but do not limit its scope.

[0224] Example 1

[0225] In Example 1, the following terms have the following definitions.

[0226] In the case of foliage, the terms “infection frequency” or “frequency efficiency” or “frequency” refer to the infection frequency of downy mildew on the entire leaf, which corresponds to the ratio between the number of observed downy mildew spots and the estimated number of leaves per plot, expressed as a percentage.

[0227] In the case of bunches, the terms “infection frequency” or “frequency efficiency” or “frequency” refer to the ratio, expressed as a percentage, between the number of bunches infected with downy mildew and the total number of bunches observed on the plot.

[0228] In the case of leaves, the terms “infection intensity” or “intensity efficiency” or “intensity” refer to the ratio, expressed as a percentage, between the surface of the plot affected by downy mildew and the surface of the entire plot observed.

[0229] In the case of ears, the terms “infection frequency” or “intensity efficiency” or “intensity” refer to the ratio, expressed as a percentage, between the surface of the ear affected by downy mildew and the surface of the entire observed plot.

[0230] I. Experimental Conditions

[0231] 1. Description of the test site

[0232] - Variety: Cabernet Sauvignon;

[0233] - Planting density: 2.25 m × 1 m, which means the theoretical density is 4444 plants / hectare;

[0234] - Pruning method: Double vine horizontal short shoot pruning, with 2 layers of lines (one load-bearing line and two lifting lines).

[0235] Location: Rodilhan, France, 30230.

[0236] 2. Characteristics of the product under study

[0237] The products used and their dosages are shown in Table 1 below.

[0238] Table 1:

[0239]

[0240] Composition and dosage of the products used in the experiment (L / ha: liters per hectare; kg / ha: kilograms per hectare)

[0241] 3. Experimental Design

[0242] The experimental design consisted of a randomized four-block design, with each basic plot containing 10 grapevines (8 of which were contaminated and observed). This design was as follows: Figure 1 As shown.

[0243] 4. To receive treatment

[0244] All treatments were administered in 2022. The first treatment (May 3, BBCH 15) was performed using a SOLO 417 backpack jet sprayer at the runoff critical value (drip). The following administration was performed face-to-face using a STIHL SR200 pneumatic backpack sprayer (theoretical volume 100 L / ha).

[0245] Table 2:

[0246]

[0247] Spray volume (L / ha)

[0248] All applied volumes in Table 2 are within + / - 10% of the target volume error.

[0249] 5. Artificial pollution, sprinkler system setup, and symptom development

[0250] On May 4th (BBCH 15-16 phase), from 4:10 pm to 5:15 pm, artificial contamination was performed on 6 leaves / vines of the 8 central vines in each base plot. To maintain a constant humidity conducive to spore germination, watering was continuously maintained from 3:00 pm to 10:00 pm, with a total water supply of approximately 20 mm.

[0251] Downy mildew spots were first observed on May 12, eight days after contamination. In the untreated control group, these spots were scored on May 17 to assess the homogeneity of symptom frequency in the trial. This score, termed F0, showed that 1.4% of leaves in replicate D were affected, lower than the other replicates (compared to 3.7%, 3.2%, and 3.3% in replicates A, B, and C, respectively), but had no significant impact on the final result.

[0252] From May 13 to May 29, approximately 10 waterings were applied (see Table 3 below), which led to a significant increase in leaf disease, particularly in frequency (39% observed in the control group on May 30). This was followed by large-scale contamination of the fruit clusters; by June 9, 60.5% of the clusters in the control group were infected, but the severity was moderate (18.5%).

[0253] The rainfall on June 6 (cumulative 1.5 mm) significantly increased the frequency of leaf infection in the control group, reaching 54.3% on June 16, but the intensity was relatively low (5%, compared to 2% on May 30). In the same plots, two irrigations (4 mm / irrigation) on June 14 and 15 resulted in a significant increase in both the frequency and intensity of the disease on the ears, reaching 90.5% and 36.1% on June 22, respectively.

[0254] Scoring of the ears on July 7 and 12, 2022 (G2 and G3) showed that, despite 25.4 mm of natural precipitation recorded between June 21 and July 4, 2022, the absolute value of symptoms showed a downward trend (see [link to relevant data]). Figure 3 and Figure 4 (Charts in the text).

[0255] Table 3:

[0256]

[0257] 2022 Sprinkler Schedule

[0258] The watering programmer, powered by a Bluetooth battery from the brand SOLEM, WooBee, triggers watering via a solenoid valve (eight 15-minute watering cycles for a 7 mm water level, eight 10-minute watering cycles for a 4 mm water level, and eight 5-minute watering cycles for a 2 mm water level).

[0259] 6. Field scoring

[0260] Table 4

[0261]

[0262] Field score summary (on 8 central grapevines in each plot)

[0263] *Calculated based on the ratio between the number of downy mildew spots observed in each plot and the estimated number of leaves (average 113 leaves per vine or 904 leaves for 8 vines per plot).

[0264] 7. Data processing type

[0265] In addition to the F0 score (assessing the frequency of infected leaves in the control group), all scores were converted to arcsin in XLSTAT software (version 2021.1.1 1080) and then subjected to ANOVA, a two-tailed Dunnett test (comparison of formulations to reference), and NEWMAN and KEULS tests with a 5% threshold (comparison between formulations).

[0266] 8. Climatology during the experiment

[0267] Figure 5 The charts in the figure represent the climatology of the test site from April 15 to July 15, 2022.

[0268] The climatic phase from May 3 (the date of the first application of the product) to July 12 (the date of the last scoring of the ears) was characterized by temperatures throughout May conforming to the seasonal standard (daily average of 20.7 °C), then slightly higher in June (25.4 °C), and finally exceptionally high throughout the first half of July, with a daily average of 27.4 °C and a maximum temperature systematically above 33 °C (40 °C on July 15).

[0269] Another characteristic of this period was the low recorded precipitation, particularly from May 4 to June 20, with a total cumulative precipitation of 22.4 mm over 48 days (including 18.8 mm on May 8). From June 21 to July 12, the cumulative precipitation over 22 days reached 25.4 mm (of which 2.7 to 8.9 mm was rainfall).

[0270] 9. The test coverage spray

[0271] Cover spray treatment is used for other diseases that were not tested in the initial trial.

[0272] As a preventative measure, protective spraying against powdery mildew was conducted on May 12 (LUNA SENSATION 0.2 L / ha) and May 25 (DYNALI 0.5 L / ha). Subsequently, during the trials, until the final scoring, no symptoms of the disease (or any other disease that could interfere with downy mildew) were observed on either the leaves or the fruit clusters.

[0273] II. Field Results

[0274] This design corresponds to the design provided by method OEPP PP 1 / 31(2).

[0275] 1. The score for the achievement on the leaf (F1)

[0276] Table 5

[0277]

[0278] Results of the scoring n°1 conducted on leaves on May 30, 2022.

[0279] (70% flowering stage, BBCH 67) - Newman-Kiers test 5%

[0280] Figure 6 The efficiency of leaf (rating n°1, F1) as of May 30, 2022 is shown.

[0281] Symptoms observed on the leaves of the control group were moderate, with a frequency of 39% and an infection intensity of 2%.

[0282] Analysis of the initial rating results showed that GDZ performed well at 3 L / ha, with frequency and intensity efficiencies of 67.9% and 78.1%, respectively, which were similar to those of ETONAN at 4 L / ha (69.2% and 74.2%).

[0283] GDZ at 2 L / ha showed similar strength to REDELI at 2.5 L / ha (44.7% vs. 45%).

[0284] Table 6

[0285]

[0286] Results of the scoring n°2 conducted on leaves on June 16, 2022

[0287] (Pea grain stage, BBCH 75) - Newman-Kiers test 5%

[0288] Figure 7 The efficiency of leaf (rating n°2, F2) on June 16, 2022 is shown.

[0289] The second assessment (F2) conducted on June 16 (17 days after F1) showed that leaf damage was increased in the control group, particularly in terms of frequency (54.3%, or an increase of 15.3 percentage points) and less in terms of intensity (5%, or an increase of 3 percentage points).

[0290] 2. Scoring results performed on the ear of fruit

[0291] Table 7

[0292]

[0293] Results of scoring n°1 conducted on the ear of fruit on June 9, 2022.

[0294] (Fruit setting ends / Bud and fruit stage begins, BBCH 71-73) - Newman-Kiers test 5%

[0295] Figure 8 The data shows the ear efficiency (rating n°1, G1) on June 9, 2022.

[0296] The results of the first scoring of the ears of fruit highlighted that the infection level was significantly higher than that observed on the leaves of the control group, with a frequency of 60.5% and an infection intensity of 18.5%.

[0297] In this case, GDZ at 3 L / ha and then 4 L / ha is particularly effective, with an efficiency of 93% at the infection intensity standard (81% for frequency), which is at a level similar to that of conventional procedures (99.2% and 95%).

[0298] The GDZ 2L / ha and then 3L / ha methods also showed perfectly satisfactory efficiency, at 82.7% under the same standard (67.8% in terms of frequency).

[0299] Table 8

[0300]

[0301] Results of scoring n°2 conducted on the ear of fruit on June 22, 2022.

[0302] (End of pea grain production / beginning of ear formation stage, BBCH 75-77) - Newman-Kiers test 5%

[0303] Figure 9 The ear efficiency (rating n°2, G2) is shown on June 22, 2022.

[0304] The second score shows that in the control group plots, downy mildew continued to spread strongly on the ears, with the infection frequency increasing by 30 percentage points (90.5%) and the intensity almost doubling (36.5%).

[0305] This significantly worsening parasitic pressure led to a marked decrease in the efficiency of unconventional methods; however, among these methods, the GDZ method, particularly at 3 L / ha and then 4 L / ha, was the best at resisting parasitic pressure and had good efficiency under the intensity criteria.

[0306] GDZ, when used at 2 L / ha and then 3 L / ha, has an efficiency of 58.6% at the same strength standard, which is more effective than REDELI 2.5L (33.1%) and ETONAN (38.4%), and even more effective at 3 L / ha and then 4 L / ha, with an efficiency of 73.5% at the strength standard.

[0307] Table 9

[0308]

[0309] Results of scoring n°3 conducted on the ear of fruit on July 7, 2022.

[0310] (During the tasseling stage, BBCH 77-79) - Newman-Kiers test 5%

[0311] Figure 10 The ear efficiency (rating n°3, G3) is shown on July 7, 2022.

[0312] Despite a cumulative natural precipitation of 13.8 mm recorded on June 23, 24 and 29, in the untreated control group, infection frequency (84%) and intensity (34.9%) remained stable on July 7, as high temperatures appeared to have prevented the spread of the disease.

[0313] III. Conclusion

[0314] The weather conditions from May to July 2022 were very favorable for the establishment and development of downy mildew, especially for the ears, with temperatures meeting or slightly exceeding seasonal standards, accompanied by weak, dry northerly winds (Misstruther winds). The only drawback was insufficient rainfall, with almost no precipitation between May 9 and June 20, but this deficiency could be compensated for by continuous and heavy watering.

[0315] Before the arrival of high heat in July, the disease spread more rapidly on the ears than on the leaves. In the untreated control plots, the highest frequency and the highest infection intensity were 90.5% and 36.1% (June 22), respectively, compared with 54.3% and 5% (June 16).

[0316] On leaves, the GDZ composition according to the invention exhibits good efficiency, comparable to that of ETONAN and REDELI.

[0317] On the spikelets, the GDZ composition according to the invention was demonstrated to be even more effective at 3 L / ha and 4 L / ha, with higher efficiency than that of ETONAN and REDELI.

[0318] The test showed that the GDZ composition according to the invention has very good performance, especially in terms of ears, compared with compositions based on REDELI or ETONAN (phosphonates) that have a similar mode of action (NDS natural defense stimulants).

[0319] It is important to emphasize that no phytotoxicity symptoms were observed in the trials using the GDZ composition according to the invention.

[0320] Example 2

[0321] The following tests were conducted to study the stability of different compositions. The stability of each composition was evaluated under different conditions:

[0322] -5 days at room temperature

[0323] - At low and high temperatures (approximately 5°C and approximately 40°C), and

[0324] - Under accelerated conditions with heating / restoring room temperature cycles.

[0325] Table 10

[0326]

[0327] Details of the different compositions are mentioned, with unstable compositions exhibiting only short-term stability of less than 1 hour.

[0328] 1. Plant materials

[0329] Tobacco seedlings of Nicotiana abentonhamiana were cultivated in seedling compost on February 27, 2024. The new shoots were transplanted on March 4, 2024, and placed in a cultivation tent for three weeks. Watering was done with tap water only once a week and three weeks after transplanting, except for watering with fertilizer.

[0330] 2. The composition under study

[0331] The products studied were the GDZ composition of Example 1, the GDZ-bis and F-41 compositions in Table 10, and the KHP composition (corresponding to a pure potassium phosphite solution of 733 g / L).

[0332] 3. To receive treatment

[0333] In this experiment, 17 treatments were performed, summarized in Table 11. For each condition, the treatment solution was sprayed onto 9 plants (10 to 12 sprays per plant, allowing runoff coverage). The new shoots were placed in a mini-greenhouse (uncovered).

[0334] Table 11

[0335]

[0336] Prepare treatment at a dose equal to the legally mandated maximum dose of KHP (4 L / ha). For example, treatment with GDZ eq 1 / 2 is administered at a dose equal to half the legally mandated maximum dose of KHP (i.e., 2 L / ha).

[0337] 4. Preparation and infection with *Phytophthora capsici* suspension

[0338] Agar blocks of *Phytophthora capsici* culture were placed in Petri dishes. 10 mL of sterile reverse osmosis water was added to each dish, and the mixture was incubated at room temperature for 1 hour. The water was then removed from each dish, and 10 mL of sterile uHQ water was added. The dishes were then incubated at 22 °C for 2 days with a photoperiod of 16 h / 8 h (22 °C / 20 °C). Two days later (March 27, 2024, the day of infection), the dishes were placed at 4 °C for 2 hours. Approximately 120 mL of water was collected from the 12 dishes. Microscopic counting showed a concentration of approximately 3500 spores / mL.

[0339] For each condition, spray with a suspension of Phytophthora capsici 10 to 12 times. Cover the tray and then remove the cover 72 hours after infection.

[0340] 5. Monitor infection

[0341] At each observation time, monitoring was conducted by scoring the overall symptoms (from 1 to 10) (i.e., severity) and by counting the number of leaves showing symptoms per plant as a percentage of the total number of leaves (i.e., incidence).

[0342] 6. Results

[0343] Infection with *Phytophthora capsici* is vigorous and rapid, occurring within 6 days of infection, except for GDZ-bis (in...). Figure 11 and Figure 12 In addition to the severity score of 6 for the GDZ-2 eq 1 / 2 condition, the severity scores of all other treatment conditions were between 8 and 10.

[0344] Figure 11 This indicates that, 3 days after infection, the mean incidence rate was lower for all treatments compared to the control group. The mean incidence rate was significantly lower for GDZ, GDZ-bis, and F-41 treatments at KHP levels of 1 / 2 and 1 / 4, respectively. Even at lower doses (eq. 1 / 5 and 1 / 6), GDZ-bis and F-41 treatments significantly reduced the mean incidence rate of infection. Figure 12 The results showed that, compared with KHP treatment, the average severity of infection was also reduced 3 days after infection when treated with GDZ, GDZ-bis, and F-41.

Claims

1. A plant quarantine composition comprising: (i) One or more metal sources selected from the following: a. Metal oxides, b. Metal complexes, and / or c. Metal salts (ii) One or more sugars and / or one or more sugar derivatives selected from the group consisting of: gluconic acid, fructose acid, glucuronic acid, galactonic acid, galacturonic acid, optionally in salt form, and (iii) One or more phosphorus derivatives selected from the group consisting of phosphorous acid and phosphites.

2. The plant quarantine composition according to claim 1, wherein the one or more phosphorus derivatives are selected from phosphorous acid or phosphites, and the phosphites are selected from potassium phosphite, zinc phosphite, calcium phosphite, silicon phosphite, sodium phosphite, manganese phosphite, magnesium phosphite or mixtures thereof, preferably potassium phosphite.

3. The plant quarantine composition according to claim 1 or claim 2, wherein the one or more metal sources are one or more metal oxides selected from the group consisting of zinc oxide, copper oxide, iron oxide, manganese oxide, aluminum oxide, preferably zinc oxide.

4. The phytosanitary composition according to any one of the preceding claims, comprising: (i) One or more metal sources with a mass fraction of 1% to 40%; (ii) one or more sugar derivatives with a mass fraction of 5% to 50%; and (iii) One or more phosphorus derivatives in a mass fraction of 35% to 80%, the mass fraction being given based on the mass of the dried composition.

5. The phytosanitary composition according to any one of the preceding claims, comprising: - One or more metal sources selected from metal oxides, wherein the metal oxides are selected from: zinc oxide, copper oxide, iron oxide, manganese oxide, aluminum oxide, preferably zinc oxide; - One or more sugar derivatives, preferably gluconic acid, and - One or more phosphorus derivatives, preferably phosphorous acid or potassium phosphite.

6. The phytosanitary composition according to any one of the preceding claims, comprising: - One or more metal sources selected from metal oxides, with a mass fraction of 2% to 25%, wherein the metal oxides are selected from: zinc oxide, copper oxide, iron oxide, manganese oxide, aluminum oxide, preferably zinc oxide; - One or more sugar derivatives, preferably gluconic acid, in a mass fraction of 10% to 50%, and - One or more phosphorus derivatives, preferably phosphorous acid or potassium phosphite, in a mass fraction of 35% to 80%. The mass fraction is given based on the mass of the dried composition.

7. The phytosanitary composition according to any one of the preceding claims, comprising: - One or more metal oxides, preferably zinc oxide, in a mass fraction of 10% to 25%; - One or more sugar derivatives, preferably gluconic acid, with a mass fraction of 30% to 50%; and - One or more phosphorous derivatives, preferably phosphorous acid, with a mass fraction of 35% to 55%. The mass fraction is given based on the mass of the dried composition.

8. The phytosanitary composition according to any one of claims 1 or 2, wherein the one or more metal sources are one or more metal complexes, preferably zinc complexes, wherein the metal complex is selected from the metal and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) complexes, preferably zinc and EDTA complexes.

9. The phytosanitary composition according to claim 8, comprising: - One or more metal sources selected from metal complexes, said metal complexes being selected from complexes with ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), preferably complexes of zinc with EDTA; -gluconic acid, and - Potassium phosphate.

10. The phytosanitary composition according to any one of claims 8 or 9, comprising: - One or more metal sources selected from metal complexes, with a mass fraction of 20% to 40%, wherein the metal complexes are selected from complexes with ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), preferably complexes of zinc and EDTA; - Gluconic acid with a mass fraction of 5% to 25%, and - Potassium phosphite with a mass fraction of 55% to 80%, the mass fraction being given based on the mass of the dried composition.

11. The plant quarantine composition according to any one of claims 1 to 2, wherein one or more metal sources are one or more metal salts, preferably zinc salts, said metal salts being selected from salts, sulfates, chlorides, carbonates and nitrates of sugar derivatives of said metals.

12. The phytosanitary composition according to any one of the preceding claims, further comprising at least one thickener, such as xanthan gum.

13. A method for preparing a plant quarantine composition according to any one of claims 1 to 12, comprising the step of mixing the following: (i) One or more metal sources, (ii) one or more sugars and / or one or more sugar derivatives; and (iii) One or more phosphorus derivatives.

14. The use of the phytosanitary composition according to any one of claims 1 to 12 in the preventive and / or curative treatment of cultivated plants that may be affected by cryptogamic diseases caused by fungi and / or oomycetes.

15. The use according to claim 14, wherein the fungus and / or oomycetes are selected from the group consisting of: *Plasmopara viticola*, *Phytophthora infestans*, *Phytophthora ramorum*, *Phytophthora cinnamomi*, *Phytophthora capsici*, *Pseudoperonospora cubensis*, *Bremia lactucae*, *Peronospora destructor*, *Venturiainaequalis*, *Venturia carpophila*, *Venturia pyrina*, *Spilocaea oleaginea*, and *Guignardia bidwellii*.

16. A method for the preventive and / or curative treatment of cryptogamy caused by fungi and / or oomycetes in cultivated plants, comprising the step of applying a phytosanitary composition according to any one of claims 1 to 12.

17. The method of claim 16, wherein the plant quarantine composition is applied by spraying, typically by foliar application, preferably on leaves and / or fruits.

18. The method according to claim 16 or 17, wherein the phytosanitary composition according to claims 1 to 6 is applied in the following dosage: at least 1% by mass of the phytosanitary composition, preferably at least 2% by mass, preferably 2% to 5% by mass, or 2.5% to 4.5% by mass of the phytosanitary composition.

19. The method according to claims 16 to 18, wherein treating or preventing cryptogamy in cultivated plants comprises reducing and / or eliminating damage caused by fungi and / or oomycetes.

Images