Insecticide formulation, production process of said formulation, its uses, and method of pest control.

Description

1 / 37 Insecticide formulation, production process of said formulation, its uses, and method of pest control.

[001] This patent application claims internal priority over process BR 10 2024 015082 1, filed on 07 / 23 / 2024, pursuant to Law No. 9,279, of May 14, 1996. FIELD OF APPLICATION

[002] The present invention is contained within the field of application of agronomic engineering, agricultural engineering, organic chemistry, physical chemistry, chemical engineering, botany and biology.

[003] More specifically, the present invention relates to a binary insecticide formulation, its production process, its uses and methods of pest control by means of the use of said formulation, said pests being those present in a plurality of crops. DESCRIPTION OF THE STATE OF THE ART

[004] The application of insecticides for pest control presents significant challenges, especially with regard to the increasing resistance of insects to the biological mechanism of action of the active ingredients. Contributing to this problem are the inappropriate use of agrochemicals, such as unnecessary dose increases, a single treatment containing multiple applications aimed at agronomic efficacy, even with a low dosage, among other incorrect and unsafe application methods.

[005] Obviously, insects acquire resistance to the continuous use of a particular insecticide. However, the incorrect use of active ingredients accelerates this process, making it necessary to search for alternatives that enable the effective control of pests that affect crops of high economic importance to a country. The irresponsible use of insecticides is also accompanied by economic losses for the farmer who, when faced with critical situations such as Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 7 / 45 2 / 37 of these, it invests even more financial resources to use increasingly larger quantities of products to control its harvest, which further reduces the profit margin due to increased expenses.

[006] In an attempt to overcome insecticide resistance in target pests, formulations containing at least two mixed active ingredients are continuously being developed. A product containing two or more active ingredients simultaneously, for example, can be used in reduced doses, in fewer applications, and also broaden the spectrum of application. Regarding this last benefit mentioned, it is worth noting that two insecticides complement each other and increase versatility in use.

[007] Considering the problem discussed above, it is essential to develop and market a range of products so that farmers have a plurality of options available. More specifically, it is important to emphasize that the variety of product options available benefits not only insecticide formulation producers, but also the entire economic ecosystem. Considering that insects typically acquire resistance to insecticides over time, a greater number of product options allows for greater market viability and sustainability, especially when considering all parties involved in the marketing network, which includes industries, farmers, producers, suppliers, and also the end consumer.

[008] When discussing product options aimed at minimizing the impacts related to insecticide resistance, as well as economic impacts, it is important to emphasize that this refers not only to the variety of types of active ingredients available, but also to the ways in which they are produced. More specifically, an insecticide formulation comprising the same active ingredients can be developed in different ways by Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 8 / 45 3 / 37 through the variation of the agronomic excipients involved (thickeners, surfactants, antifreeze, humectants, etc.).

[009] In this sense, once a new combination of previously unknown active ingredients is commercialized, for example, it can be used sustainably for a long period, as other product options will naturally emerge, even if containing the same active insecticides, differing only in the way they are formulated. In this direction, binary compositions based on thiamethoxam mixed with fenpropathrin are gaining prominence in the market – however, there are still few publications of this type of composition in the state of the art, which largely reflects the limited options of commercially available products. When it comes to oil dispersions (OD), as in the case of the present invention, the limitation is even greater, which constitutes a need for the development of new products of this nature.It is known that the type of formulation, such as oil dispersions (OD), water-dispersible granules (WG), and concentrated suspensions (SC), presents advantages and disadvantages depending on the type of agronomic application, spray mixture preparation and application methods, dilution strategies, etc. Therefore, it is crucial that formulations of the same type(s) of active ingredient(s) are available on the market in a variety of forms (OD, WG, SC), because farmers seeking a specific insecticide can choose them according to their treatment strategy. In other words, for a given application strategy, the same consumer may prefer, for example, to use an OD formulation of thiamethoxam and fenpropathrin instead of an SC or WG formulation of thiamethoxam and fenpropathrin.

[0010] Oil dispersions are particularly advantageous compared to WG dispersions, since the latter is not easily diluted in water. This characteristic facilitates obtaining a spray solution with potentially undesirable large particles, as these can clog spray nozzles. Furthermore, the observed heterogeneity Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 9 / 45 4 / 37 in this type of mixture also significantly reduces agronomic performance. Furthermore, the operator of a WG product production process is exposed to hazardous dust. All these problems are absent in OD type mixtures.

[0011] Because they are water-based, SC-type formulations are considerably disadvantageous from the point of view of the chemical stability of the active ingredients. Hydrolysis, an inconvenience present in these types of products, promotes the rapid degradation of molecules and, therefore, the shelf life of concentrated suspensions is significantly shorter compared to oil dispersions. Consequently, the storage time is considerably short. This problem is non-existent in OD compositions. The latter are easily diluted, homogeneous and highly durable, and can be stored for a longer period.

[0012] In light of the limited options for DO formulations of thiamethoxam and fenpropathrin, there is a significant need in the state of the art for the development of new oil dispersions containing these active ingredients. The few existing ones use toxic agronomic excipients based on pyrrolidone and dimethylformamide derivatives and lack key thickeners. The latter are significantly important in DO mixtures, as they significantly affect physicochemical stability and, therefore, caution is essential to avoid agronomic excipients that may retain water in their composition. Hydrophobic control is important in this case, since the oil dispersion is, essentially and evidently, a hydrophobic system.In addition to being particularly disadvantageous in the context of the present invention, essentially because they are of the WG and SC type, the thiamethoxam and fenpropathrin formulations of this nature, disclosed in the prior art, contain hydrophilic thickeners, which would certainly affect the physicochemical stability of those of the OD type. Furthermore, said compositions make use of high concentrations of the emulsifying and / or dispersing system. Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 10 / 45 5 / 37

[0013] Document CN103636658, for example, describes OD formulations of thiamethoxam and fenpropathrin comprising toxic components derived from pyrrolidone and are free of thickeners, which are essential for stabilizing this type of composition.

[0014] Document CN105660681, in turn, reveals compositions of thiamethoxam and fenpropathrin in WG and SC form and, therefore, presents the disadvantages discussed above. In addition to comprising hydrophilic thickeners, which would unduly compromise the physicochemical stability in OD formulations such as that of the present invention, said compositions contain dispersants and / or emulsifiers in high concentrations.

[0015] In this way, the state of the art would clearly benefit from the advent of a new OD-type thiamethoxam and phenpropathrin formulation, said formulation comprising essential components for high physicochemical stability.

[0016] Furthermore, the prior art will clearly benefit from a production process for the thiamethoxam and fenpropathrin OD formulation containing well-defined steps, unit operations, and process variables. Because they are dispersed active ingredients, thiamethoxam and fenpropathrin obtained as finely divided particles are some of the advantages resulting from a robust production process, and it is also a binary formulation not easily obtained through poorly developed production processes and inadequate agronomic excipients. Consequently, the use of said formulation and method for pest treatment is another advantage of the present invention.

[0017] Furthermore, the insecticide formulation also represents an alternative formulation to the state of the art, achieving results through different technical approaches, both from a product and a process perspective. Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 11 / 45 6 / 37 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0018] In a first aspect, the present invention relates to an insecticidal formulation comprising the following components: (a) thiamethoxam; (b) phenpropathrin; (c) hydrophobic pyrogenic silica treated with dichlorodimethyl silane; and (d) an oil.

[0019] In a second aspect, the present invention relates to a process for producing the insecticide formulation, said process comprising the following steps: (a) In a formulation tank, add the oil and start stirring; (b) add the fenpropathrin to the oil and stir; obtaining a first mixture; (c) add calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate to the first mixture and stir; obtaining a second mixture; (d) add to the second mixture the ethoxylated castor oil comprising 35 to 40 mol of ethylene glycol (EO), and stir; obtaining a third mixture; (e) add the polyether phosphate to the third mixture and stir; obtaining a fourth mixture; (f) Add the acrylic copolymer solution to the fourth mixture and stir; obtaining a fifth mixture; (g) Add thiamethoxam to the fifth mixture and stir; obtaining a sixth mixture; Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 12 / 45 7 / 37 (h) add the hydrophobic pyrogenic silica treated with dichlorodimethyl silane to the sixth mixture and stir; obtaining a seventh mixture; (i) subjecting the seventh mixture to grinding; obtaining a particulate mixture comprising particles; and (j) subjecting the particulate mixture to particle size monitoring and mesh testing, and making decision (1) or (2), said decisions being: (1) if the particle size consists of a value outside the range between 4 and 7 micrometers and there is retention on 325 mesh, repeat step (i) above; or (2) if the particle size consists of a value within the range between 4 and 7 micrometers and there is no retention on 325 mesh, the insecticide formulation is obtained.

[0020] In a third aspect, the present invention relates to the use of the insecticidal formulation for the control of selected pests from the group comprising Anthonomus grandis, Anticarsia gemmatalis, Bemisia tabaci, Deois flavopicta, Diabrotica speciosa, Diaphorina citri, Dichelops furcatus, Dichelops melacanthus, Diloboderus abderus, Enneothrips enigmaticus, Enneothrips flavens, Euetheola humilis, Euschistus heros, Frankliniella schultzei, Frankliniella williamsi, Helicoverpa zeae, Heterotermes tenuis, Leptocybe invasa, Leucoptera coffeella, Mahanarva fimbriolata, Mahanarva spp, Myzus persicae, Nezara viridula, Oebalus poecilus, Oncometopia facialis, Phyllophaga cuiabana, Piezodorus guildinii, Quesada gigas, Rachiplusia nu, Rhopalosiphum graminum, Scaptocoris castânea, Sphenophorus levis, Spodopotera white, Spodoptera frugiperda, Spodoptera cosmiodes or Spodoptera eridania.

[0021] In a fourth aspect, the present invention relates to a method of controlling pests, said pests being Euschistos heros (brown stink bug) in soybeans, said method comprising a single application of the insecticide formulation, as described herein, said application being at the location of the pests, said doses of the active ingredients during the application of said Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 13 / 45 The 8 / 37 formulation contains 105 to 126 g / ha of thiamethoxam and 90 to 108 g / ha of fenpropathrin. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0022] The subject matter of this invention will become fully clear in its technical aspects from the detailed description that will be made based on the figures below, in which:

[0023] Figure 1: Flowchart of the main mode of the insecticide formulation production process.

[0024] Figure 2: Flowchart of a preferred embodiment for the insecticide formulation production process. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0025] In a first aspect, the present invention relates to an INSECTICIDE FORMULATION comprising the following components: (a) thiamethoxam; (b) phenpropathrin; (c) hydrophobic pyrogenic silica treated with dichlorodimethyl silane; and (d) an oil.

[0026] In a non-restrictive embodiment of the present invention, said components of the insecticide formulation are present in the following concentrations, in mass percentage by volume (% m / V): (a) 5 to 30% of thiamethoxam, preferably 10 to 25%, more preferably 21%; (b) 5 to 30% fenpropathrin, preferably 10 to 25%, more preferably 18%; Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 14 / 45 9 / 37 (c) 0.5 to 8% of hydrophobic pyrogenic silica treated with dichlorodimethyl silane, preferably 1 to 5%, more preferably 2%; and (d) 30 to 70% of the oil, preferably 45 to 60%, more preferably 56%.

[0027] In a non-restrictive embodiment of the present invention, the oil is refined biodiesel based on soybean methyl esters.

[0028] In a non-restrictive embodiment of the present invention, the insecticidal formulation additionally comprises the following components: (e) calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate; (f) ethoxylated castor oil comprising 35 to 40 moles of ethylene glycol (EO); (g) a phosphate polyether; and (h) an acrylic copolymer solution.

[0029] For the purposes of better understanding the present invention, it should be understood that a more detailed description of polyether phosphate was not possible in the present invention, since the inventors used this component as originating from the Break Thru DA 655 trademark in the year 2024. More specifically, the supplier of this component, namely Evonik, did not disclose further details of what exactly is said to be polyether phosphate, nor of the composition in which said polymer is contained. Such information, as commonly occurs in the technical field of the present invention, is a trade secret. Therefore, in order for a person skilled in the art, based on this descriptive report, to realize the insecticidal formulation, it is necessary to use the polyether phosphate of the Break Thru DA 655 brand from Evonik in effect in 2024 (or a similar product). Any improvement of this component over time is also acceptable for use in the present invention. Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 15 / 45 10 / 37 invention, provided it remains a polyether phosphate, and provided it is derived from the aforementioned trademark. Similar reasoning applies to the acrylic copolymer solution, although a more detailed description of the nature of this copolymer is limited. In order for a person skilled in the art to realize the insecticide formulation without the need for undue experimentation, the acrylic copolymer solution of the trademark Atlox 4913 valid in 2024, supplied by Croda Crop Care, should be used. The eventual use of an optimized product derived from this trademark is permitted in the insecticide formulation, provided it is an acrylic copolymer solution.

[0030] In a non-restrictive embodiment of the present invention, the additional components are present in the insecticide formulation at the following concentrations, in mass percentage by volume (% m / V): (e) 0.6 to 6% calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate, preferably 1.5 to 4%, more preferably 2.7%; (f) 0.3 to 4% of ethoxylated castor oil comprising 35 to 40 moles of ethylene glycol (EO), preferably 0.6 to 2%, more preferably 1.3%; (g) 0.5 to 8% of polyether phosphate, preferably 1 to 5%, more preferably 2%; and (h) 0.3 to 4% of acrylic copolymer solution, preferably 0.6 to 2%, more preferably 1%.

[0031] In a second aspect, the present invention relates to a PROCESS FOR PRODUCING the insecticide formulation, said process comprising the following steps: (a) In a formulation tank, add the oil and start stirring; (b) add the fenpropathrin to the oil and stir; obtaining a first mixture; Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 16 / 45 11 / 37 (c) add calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate to the first mixture and stir; obtaining a second mixture; (d) add to the second mixture the ethoxylated castor oil comprising 35 to 40 mol of ethylene glycol (EO), and stir; obtaining a third mixture; (e) add the polyether phosphate to the third mixture and stir; obtaining a fourth mixture; (f) Add the acrylic copolymer solution to the fourth mixture and stir; obtaining a fifth mixture; (g) Add thiamethoxam to the fifth mixture and stir; obtaining a sixth mixture; (h) add the hydrophobic pyrogenic silica treated with dichlorodimethyl silane to the sixth mixture and stir; obtaining a seventh mixture; (i) subjecting the seventh mixture to grinding; obtaining a particulate mixture comprising particles; and (j) subjecting the particulate mixture to particle size monitoring and mesh testing, and making decision (1) or (2), said decisions being: (1) if the particle size consists of a value outside the range between 4 and 7 micrometers and there is retention on 325 mesh, repeat step (i) above; or (2) if the particle size consists of a value within the range between 4 and 7 micrometers and there is no retention on 325 mesh, the insecticide formulation is obtained.

[0032] The agitations mentioned throughout the stages of the process described are carried out by a stainless steel mixer equipped with a disc-type agitation system (shear). In this context, the agitation speed is controlled until vortex formation, which is widely known to a person skilled in the art. Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 17 / 45 12 / 37

[0033] In a non-restrictive embodiment of the present invention, the agitations mentioned throughout the stages of the process described are carried out at speeds between 200 and 600 rpm, preferably between 250 and 400 rpm, more preferably 300 rpm.

[0034] In a non-restrictive embodiment of the present invention, the agitation of steps (a) and (b) is carried out at a temperature of 35 to 65 °C, preferably 45 to 55 °C, more preferably 50 °C.

[0035] In a non-restrictive embodiment of the present invention, the agitations of steps (c) to (h) are carried out at a temperature of 18 to 30 °C, preferably 20 °C.

[0036] In a non-restrictive embodiment of the present invention, the agitations mentioned throughout the steps of the process described are carried out under the following conditions: - agitation in steps (b), (c), (d), (e), (f) and (h) is carried out for 1 to 20 minutes, preferably for 5 to 15 minutes, more preferably for 10 minutes; and - agitation in step (g) is carried out for 5 to 60 minutes, preferably for 15 to 40 minutes, more preferably for 20 minutes.

[0037] Although the components mentioned in the production process description have been described in their broadest scope, it should be understood that their respective more specific modalities are those already previously mentioned in the fungicide formulation description. In this sense, a further explanation of these modalities is unnecessary since they have already been clarified previously.

[0038] In a non-restrictive embodiment of the present invention, the components are added in amounts (% m / V) described below: Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 18 / 45 13 / 37 - in step (a) the oil is added in quantities of 30 to 70%, preferably 45 to 60%, more preferably 56%; - in step (b) fenpropathrin is added in amounts of 5 to 30%, preferably 10 to 25%, more preferably 18%; - in step (c) calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate is added in amounts of 0.6 to 6%, preferably 1.5 to 4%, more preferably 2.7%; - in step (d) ethoxylated castor oil comprising 35 to 40 mol of ethylene glycol (EO) is added in amounts of 0.3 to 4%, preferably 0.6 to 2%, more preferably 1.3%; - in step (e) polyether phosphate is added in amounts of 0.5 to 8%, preferably 1 to 5%, more preferably 2%; - in step (f) the acrylic copolymer solution is added in amounts of 0.3 to 4%, preferably 0.6 to 2%, more preferably 1%; - in step (g) thiamethoxam is added in amounts of 5 to 30%, preferably 10 to 25%, more preferably 21%; and - in step (h) hydrophobic pyrogenic silica treated with dichlorodimethyl silane is added in amounts of 0.5 to 8%, preferably 1 to 5%, more preferably 2%.

[0039] In a non-restrictive embodiment of the present invention, in step (i) the grinding is carried out in a laboratory-scale vertical immersion bead mill, an industrial-scale horizontal bead mill or an industrial-scale vertical immersion bead mill, said grinding being carried out at a temperature between 13 and 37 °C, preferably between 15 and 30 °C, more preferably at 25 °C. Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 19 / 45 14 / 37

[0040] In a non-restrictive embodiment of the present invention, when the mill used in step (i) is a laboratory-scale vertical immersion bead mill, grinding is carried out for 1 hour. As described in step (j), if the particle size and mesh parameters are not met, step (i) must be repeated until the particles of the particulate mixture meet such parameters. In this context, grinding must be carried out for another 1 hour, and so on, until the particle size comprises a value between 4 and 7 micrometers and said particles are no longer retained on a 325 mesh.

[0041] In a non-restrictive embodiment of the present invention, when the mill used in step (i) is the industrial-scale horizontal bead mill, the grinding is carried out in cycles of random duration previously chosen by an operator, the number of cycles being that which is sufficient to meet the size and retention parameters described in step (j), that is, particle size between 4 and 7 micrometers and zero retention on a 325 mesh. More specifically, until such parameters are reached, the grinding must be carried out in several cycles, which may be just one or more.

[0042] In a non-restrictive embodiment of the present invention, when the mill used in step (i) is an industrial-scale vertical immersion bead mill, grinding is performed for 1 hour. As described in step (j), if the particle size and mesh parameters are not met, step (i) must be repeated. In this context, if the first 1-hour cycle is not sufficient, grinding must be repeated for another 30 minutes, and so on, until the particle size comprises a value between 4 and 7 micrometers and said particles are no longer retained on a 325 mesh. More specifically, the additional 30-minute cycles will be performed in the quantities necessary for the parameters defined in step (j) to be achieved, and there may be one or more 30-minute repetitions until such parameters are reached. Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 20 / 45 15 / 37

[0043] In a third aspect, the present invention relates to the USE of the insecticidal formulation for the control of selected pests from the group comprising Anthonomus grandis, Anticarsia gemmatalis, Bemisia tabaci, Deois flavopicta, Diabrotica speciosa, Diaphorina citri, Dichelops furcatus, Dichelops melacanthus, Diloboderus abderus, Enneothrips enigmaticus, Enneothrips flavens, Euetheola humilis, Euschistus heros, Frankliniella schultzei, Frankliniella williamsi, Helicoverpa zeae, Heterotermes tenuis, Leptocybe invasa, Leucoptera coffeella, Mahanarva fimbriolata, Mahanarva spp, Myzus persicae, Nezara viridula, Oebalus poecilus, Oncometopia facialis, Phyllophaga cuiabana, Piezodorus guildinii, Quesada gigas, Rachiplusia nu, Rhopalosiphum graminum, Scaptocoris castânea, Sphenophorus levis, Spodopotera white, Spodoptera frugiperda, Spodoptera cosmiodes or Spodoptera eridania.

[0044] In a non-restrictive embodiment of the present invention, the pests are present in selected crops from the group comprising cotton, peanuts, rice, potatoes, sugarcane, citrus, eucalyptus, beans, corn, pastures, soybeans, sorghum, wheat, tomatoes or coffee.

[0045] In a non-restrictive embodiment of the present invention, pests are present respectively in the following crops: - Anthonomus grandis or Bemisia tabaci in cotton; - Enneothrips flavens, Enneothrips enigmaticus or Frankliniella schultzei in peanuts; - Oebalus poecilus in rice; - Diabrotica speciosa in potatoes; - Sphenophorus levis, Mahanarva fimbriolata, Mahanarva spp, Heterotermes tenuis, Euetheola humilis or Diloboderus abderus in sugarcane; - Diaphorina citri or Oncometopia facialis in citrus; - Leptocybe invades eucalyptus; Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, p. 21 / 45 16 / 37 - Diabrotica speciosa or Bemisia tabaci in beans; - Spodopotera frugiperda, Helicoverpa zeae, Dichelops melacanthus, Dichelops furcatus, Frankliniella williamsi, Phyllophaga cuiabana or Scaptocoris castânea in corn; - Deois flavopicta in pastures; - Anticarsia gemmatalis, Spodopotera frugiperda, Spodopotera albula, Spodoptera cosmiodes, Spodoptera eridania, Rachiplusia nu, Nezara viridula, Euschistus heros, Piezodorus guildinii, Diabrotica speciosa, Bemisia tabaci, Dichelops melacanthus or Dichelops furcatus in soybeans; - Spodoptera frugiperda in sorghum; - Dichelops melacanthus or Rhopalosiphum graminum in wheat; - Bemisia tabaci, Myzus persicae, Franklinela schultzei or Diabrotica speciosa in tomatoes; and - Quesada gigas or Leucoptera coffeella in the cafe.

[0046] In a fourth aspect, the present invention relates to a METHOD OF PEST CONTROL, said pests being Euschistos heros (brown stink bug) in soybeans, said method comprising a single application of the insecticide formulation, as described herein, said application being at the pest site, said doses of the active ingredients during the application of said formulation being 105 to 126 g / ha of thiamethoxam and 90 to 108 g / ha of fenpropathrin.

[0047] Preferred examples of how the present invention is conceived by someone skilled in the art will be described below. However, such examples do not limit the scope of protection of the present invention and are disclosed here only for the purpose of better understanding it. Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, p. 22 / 45 17 / 37 Example 1

[0048] A preferred and non-limiting example of the present invention is the insecticide formulation comprising the components and their respective concentrations, as described in Table 1.

[0049] Table 1: A preferred example of an insecticide formulation comprising thiamethoxam and fenpropathrin, said example showing the respective concentrations of each component, in % w / v, % w / meg / L, and its function. Concentration Concentration Function CAS % m / V % m / mg / L Thiamethoxam TC 21.0 20 210 Active ingredient 153719-23-4 Fenpropathrin TC 18.0 17.1 180 Active ingredient 39515-41-8 Calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate 70% 3.8 3.6 37.5 Emulsifier 26264-06-2 Ethoxylated castor oil with 35 to 40 mol of ethylene glycol (EO) 1.3 1.2 12.5 Emulsifier 61791-12-6 Break Thru DA 655 (polyether phosphate) 2.0 1.9 20 Dispersant N / A Acrylic copolymer solution 1.0 1 10 Dispersant N / A Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 23 / 45 18 / 37 Hydrophobic pyrogenic silica treated with dichlorodimethyl silane 2.0 1.9 20 Thickener 68611-44-9 Refined biodiesel (soybean oil methyl esters) 56.0 53.3 560.1 Solvent 67784-80-9

[0050] Calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate 70% is preferably of the brands RHODACAL 70 / B, NINATE® 70B, AGNIQUE ABS 70 C, SURFOM 1287 CE, EMULSON, AG / CAL or Nansa EVM 70B

[0051] Ethoxylated castor oil with 35 to 40 mol of ethylene glycol (EO) is preferably of the brands Ambrosol 365, Cremophor EL, Agnique CSO-36, Protachem CO-40 or Stero CO 350 MG.

[0052] Polyether phosphate is preferably of the Break Thru DA 655 brand.

[0053] The acrylic copolymer solution is preferably of the Atlox 4913 brand.

[0054] Hydrophobic pyrogenic silica treated with dichlorodimethyl silane is preferably of the AEROSIL R972 brand.

[0055] Refined biodiesel is preferably from the brands AGROSOLV BIO ME or SYNTHER 1888.

[0056] Hydrophobic pyrogenic silica treated with dichlorodimethyl silane was highly important in view of its efficient hydrophobic property, reducing the chances of water absorption, which interfere with the overall compositional stability. Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 24 / 45 19 / 37

[0057] The emulsifying and dispersing system is present in low concentrations, which is sufficient for the stability and agronomic performance of the insecticide formulation. Example 2

[0058] For the purposes of better understanding this example, which refers to the description of the production process of the insecticide formulation described in Table 1, it should be understood that the concentrations of the components described herein are exactly those as described herein in said Table 1, and in any of the units of measurement specified herein (% m / V, g / L or % m / m).

[0059] In this preferred and non-restrictive example, the insecticide formulation production process comprises the following steps: (1) In a formulating tank, add the refined biodiesel and activate the agitation system at 300 rpm at 50 °C - the amount of refined biodiesel in this step is 100% of that specified in table 1; (2) Add the fenpropathrin and stir for 10 minutes at 300 rpm at 50 °C - the amount of fenpropathrin in this step is 100% of that specified in Table 1; (3) Add the 70% calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate and stir for 10 minutes at 300 rpm at 20 °C - the amount of 70% calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate in this step is 100% of that specified in Table 1; (4) Add the ethoxylated castor oil with 35 to 40 mol of ethylene glycol (EO) and stir for 10 minutes at 300 rpm at 20 °C - the amount of ethoxylated castor oil with 35 to 40 mol of ethylene glycol (EO) in this step is 100% of that specified in Table 1; (5) Add the polyether phosphate and stir for 10 minutes at 300 rpm at 20 °C - the amount of polyether phosphate in this step is 100% of that specified in Table 1; Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 25 / 45 20 / 37 (6) add the acrylic copolymer solution and stir for 10 minutes at 300 rpm at 20 °C - the amount of acrylic copolymer solution in this step is 100% of that specified in table 1; (7) Add the thiamethoxam and stir for 20 minutes at 300 rpm at 20 °C - the amount of thiamethoxam in this step is 100% of that specified in Table 1; (8) Add hydrophobic fumed silica treated with dichlorodimethyl silane and stir for 10 minutes at 300 rpm at 20 °C - the amount of hydrophobic fumed silica treated with dichlorodimethyl silane in this step is 100% of that specified in Table 1; (9) perform grinding until obtaining particles of size (d98) between 4 and 7 micrometers and zero or negligible retention on a 325 mesh; (10) check the particle size on an analyzer and parallel control on a 325 mesh grid; if it is in accordance with the control parameters specified in step (9), proceed to the next step; otherwise, continue grinding for the time required to obtain such size and mesh characteristics; and (11) perform a physical-chemical / chromatographic control of the final product obtained in step (10) and also a quality control for approval - the parameters involved in these control steps must comply with the technical specifications described in table 2.

[0060] With regard to the process described above, it should be noted that grinding in step (9) is carried out by means of cooling and recirculation, so that the temperature must be maintained in the range of 25 ± 12 °C.

[0061] Grinding can be carried out in a Hockmeyer immersion vertical bead mill (laboratory scale), horizontal mill of Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 26 / 45 21 / 37 LM pearls (industrial scale) or Hockmeyer vertical immersion pearl mill (industrial scale).

[0062] When the Hockmeyer vertical immersion bead mill (laboratory scale) is used, grinding must be carried out for 1 hour until the control parameters specified in step (9) are met.

[0063] When the horizontal pearl mill (industrial scale) is used, grinding must be carried out in cycles and at the end of each cycle particle size monitoring and 325 mesh test are performed. The cycles are performed until the control parameters specified in step (9) are met and their duration is randomly chosen by the operator.

[0064] When the Hockmeyer vertical immersion bead mill (industrial scale) is used, grinding is initially carried out for 1 hour, followed by particle size monitoring and testing on a 325 mesh screen. If the control parameters specified in step (9) are not met, grinding is repeated in 30-minute cycles until these requirements are met.

[0065] Table 2: Physicochemical parameters for quality control of the insecticide formulation that must be met after it is obtained in the production process. CONTROL PARAMETERS PARAMETER ACCEPTANCE RANGE Appearance - Visual Homogeneous suspension Color - Visual (Pantone Edition 20 7500C / 7501C / 7401C Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 27 / 45 22 / 37 pH 4.30-5.30 Density (g / mL) 1.0300 - 1.0700 Foam (mL) max 50 mL in 1 min Viscosity (seconds) 18 - 40 Particle size (dse, micrometers) 4 to 7 325 mesh test In-process product: no residue or negligible. 200 mesh test Final product: no residue or negligible. Thiamethoxam content (% w / v) 19.74 - 22.26 Fenpropathrin content (% w / v) 16.92 - 19.08 Stability at 54°C Should not form a compact mass; phase separation may occur; however, it should redisperse after agitation. Example 3

[0066] Based on the parameters described in Example 2, physicochemical tests were performed using the insecticide formulation.

[0067] Table 3: Results obtained in physicochemical tests with the pesticide formulation. Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 28 / 45 23 / 37 CONTROL PARAMETERS PARAMETER RESULT Temperature (°C) 0 3 54 Appearance - Visual Fluid sample, without lumps or sedimentation 1.4 cm separation, with higher viscosity at the bottom. The sample easily re-incorporates under agitation. No presence of crystals 3.2 cm separation, with higher viscosity at the bottom. The sample re-incorporates under agitation. No crystals present. Color - Visual (Pantone) Edition 20 7401C 7401C 7401C pH 3.89 3.87 3.77 Density (g / mL) 1.0316 1.0354 1.0346 Foam (mL) 0 0 0 Viscosity (seconds) 24.36 24.34 24.38 Particle size (d98, micrometers) 5.32 5.22 5.45 Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 29 / 45 24 / 37 325 mesh test Complies Complies Complies 200 mesh test Complies Complies Complies Thiamethoxam content (% w / v) 20.76 20.77 20.78 Fenpropathrin content (% w / v) 19.01 18.92 18.60

[0068] Due to the formation of phase separation with parameters outside the values ​​determined in the acceptance range, new tests were carried out using the insecticide formulation with changes in mixing time, order of addition and repetition of grinding cycles.

[0069] Table 4: Results obtained in physicochemical tests after adjusting formulation parameters. CONTROL PARAMETERS PARAMETER RESULT Temperature (°C) 0 3 54 Appearance - Visual Fluid sample, without lumps or sedimentation 0.4 cm separation, with higher viscosity at the bottom. The sample shows 0.3 cm separation, with higher viscosity at the bottom. The sample shows Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 30 / 45 25 / 37 It easily re-incorporates upon agitation. There is no presence of crystals. It easily re-incorporates upon agitation. No crystals present. Color - Visual (Pantone Edition 20 7401C 7401C 7401C pH 4.79 4.42 5.07 Density (g / mL) 1.0343 1.0351 1.0369 Foam (mL) 0 0 0 Viscosity (seconds) 24.35 25.01 27.10 Particle size (d98, micrometers) 5.26 5.87 6.10 325 mesh test Meets Meets Meets 200 mesh test Meets Meets Meets Thiamethoxam content (% w / v) 21.02 20.98 20.68 Fenpropathrin content (% w / v) 18.51 18.75 18.55 Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 31 / 45 26 / 37

[0070] The physicochemical analysis of the formulation after adjustments met the parameters established in the acceptance range, and it was selected as the formulation for the present invention. Example 4

[0071] The insecticide formulation was also subjected to thermal stability tests at temperatures of 0 and 54 °C.

[0072] Based on the observed results, the insecticide formulation maintained the physicochemical properties of all parameters described in Table 2.

[0073] Therefore, this formulation is stable at room temperature for at least 2 years, as well as exhibiting stability in climatic conditions under reduced temperatures.

[0074] The observed results reflected the formulation as a whole, that is, the strategically chosen components and their concentrations. The way in which the formulation was obtained also had a direct influence.

[0075] The selection and proportion of adjuvants in insecticide formulations, such as emulsifiers, dispersants, thickeners, and solvents, not only ensure the physical stability of the composition but also directly influence the bioavailability of the active ingredients, their distribution in the spray solution, and their adherence to plant surfaces. Chemically, these adjuvants act at different interfaces, such as oil and water, solid and liquid, and air and liquid, modifying surface tension and promoting a homogeneous dispersion of the active ingredients. Alterations in any of these parameters compromise the thermodynamic stability of the system, making the formulation susceptible to phase separation, sedimentation, or loss of biological efficacy. Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, page 32 / 45 27 / 37

[0076] Emulsifiers such as calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate and ethoxylated castor oil, for example, play essential roles in the formation and stability of emulsions. These compounds act synergistically to form micelles and stabilize oil-in-water or water-in-oil systems. The ratio between these emulsifiers is critical, as an inappropriate variation can result in unstable emulsions, with visible phase separation or the formation of aggregates that directly affect the spraying and absorption of active ingredients by target plants or insects. Furthermore, the order of addition of these components influences the orientation of the molecules at the interface, altering the efficiency of emulsification.

[0077] Polyether phosphate and acrylic copolymer dispersants are responsible for maintaining the colloidal stability of the insecticide suspension. Through steric and electrostatic repulsion mechanisms, these dispersants prevent the aggregation of solid particles in the formulation. Variations in their concentration or use under unsuitable physicochemical conditions, such as critical pH or temperature ranges, compromise the kinetic stability of the system, leading to flocculation, sedimentation, or difficulty in redispersing the formulation, especially after prolonged storage. These effects reduce the consistency and effectiveness of the application in the field.

[0078] Hydrophobic pyrogenic silica, modified with dichlorodimethylsilane, acts as a thickener and rheological modifier. Its hydrophobic surface interacts with the oil phase, promoting three-dimensional structuring and viscosity control. The concentration of this component is fundamental to ensure adequate rheology that allows good stability during storage and ease of redistribution before application. Changes in its quantity directly affect the mechanical stability of the suspension, and may lead to phase separation or the formation of hard sediments that do not disperse easily. Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, pages 33 / 45 28 / 37

[0079] The solvent used, refined biodiesel, plays a dual role in the formulation: it partially solubilizes the active ingredients and serves as a continuous medium for the dispersion of adjuvants. The composition of the biodiesel, particularly the proportion of methyl esters and the absence of residual impurities, directly influences the polarity of the system and, consequently, the solubility of the active ingredients and the formation of microstructures such as micelles or microemulsions. Variations in the composition or quantity of biodiesel modify the balance between the phases of the formulation, affecting its stability and biological performance.

[0080] Thus, the proposed insecticide formulation constitutes a chemically complex system sensitive to variations in multiple parameters. The interaction between active ingredients and adjuvants depends on specific physicochemical conditions and the precise maintenance of their proportions. Any alteration outside the specified conditions compromises the agronomic performance, shelf stability, and safety of the product, which chemically demonstrates the inventiveness and criticality of the formulation claimed herein. Example 5

[0081] Efficacy tests were performed by applying the insecticide formulation to control Euschistos heros (brown stink bug) in soybean crops. More specifically, the efficacy of said formulation comprising thiamethoxam (thiame) at doses of 84, 105, and 126 g / ha combined with fenpropathrin (fenpro) at doses of 72, 90, and 108 g / ha, respectively, was evaluated. It is important to note that these doses were prepared from the insecticide formulation described in Table 1.

[0082] The treatment involves a single application of the formulation to the plague. Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, pp. 34 / 45 29 / 37

[0083] Control efficiency was evaluated and the results are shown in Tables 5 and 6 below.

[0084] Table 5: Control efficiency of Euschistos heros (brown stink bug) in soybeans. Observations at 2 and 6 days after application (2 DDA; 6 DDA) - N = nymphs; A = adults; T = total (N + A); E% = percentage of efficiency. Insecticide formulation Dose 2 DAA 6 DAA ai / ha NATE% NATE% Tiame + fenpro 84 + 72 0 14 14 40 0 ​​16 16 37 Tiame + fenpro 105 + 90 0 8 8 78 0 9 9 77 Tiame + fenpro 126 + 108 0 9 9 78 0 9 9 80 Witness 0 2 29 31 N / A 2 32 34 N / A

[0085] Table 6: Control efficiency of Euschistos heros (brown stink bug) in soybeans. Observations at 10 and 14 days after application (10 DDA; 14 DDA) - N = nymphs; A = adults; T = total (N + A); E% = percentage of efficiency. Insecticide formulation Dose 10 DAA 14 DAA aia / ha NATE% NATE% Tiame + fenpro 84 + 72 0 12 12 72 1 14 15 49 Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, pages 35 / 45 30 / 37 Thiamin + fenprox 105 + 90 0 11 11 84 3 12 15 60 Thiamin + fenprox 126 + 108 0 12 12 85 1 13 14 73 Control 0 3 55 58 N / A 1 38 39 N / A

[0086] As observed, the insecticide formulation was effective in controlling the pest subjected to treatment, especially at the “thiamen + fenpro” doses given by “105 + 90 g / ha” and “126 + 108 g / ha”. Example 6

[0087] Efficacy tests were performed by applying the insecticide formulation to control Euschistos heros (brown stink bug) in soybean crops. More specifically, the efficacy of said formulation comprising thiamethoxam (thiame) at doses of 84, 105, and 126 g / ha combined with fenpropathrin (fenpro) at doses of 72, 90, and 108 g / ha, respectively, was evaluated. It is important to note that these doses were prepared from the insecticide formulation described in Table 1.

[0088] Table 7: Control efficiency of Dichelops melacanthus (green stink bug) in soybeans. Observations at 2 and 6 days after application (2 DDA; 6 DDA) - N = nymphs; A = adults; T = total (N + A); E% = percentage of efficiency. Insecticide formulation Dose 2 DAA 6 DAA ai / ha NATE% NATE% Tiame + fenpro 60 + 90 4 8 12 69 9 13 22 54 Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, pp. 36 / 45 31 / 37 Thiamin + fenprox 80 + 90 5 5 10 73 9 17 26 42 Thiamin + fenprox 100 + 90 6 8 14 69 3 13 16 74 Control 0 25 24 49 N / A 24 35 59 N / A

[0089] Table 8: Control efficiency of Dichelops melacanthus (green stink bug) in soybean. Observations at 10 and 15 days after application (10 DDA; 15 DDA) - N = nymphs; A = adults; T = total (N + A); E% = percentage of efficiency. Insecticide formulation Dose 10 DAA 15 DAA aia / ha NATE% NATE% Tiame + fenpro 60 + 90 6 21 27 33 6 35 41 40 Tiame + fenpro 80 + 90 2 21 23 37 1 30 31 59 Tiame + fenpro 100 + 90 1 21 22 58 2 32 34 65 Witness 0 8 33 41 N / A 17 61 78 N / A

[0090] Based on the results obtained in the efficacy tests, it was observed that concentrations of 126 g / ha of thiamethoxam combined with 108 g / ha of fenpropathrin provided the best performance in controlling Euschistus heros, reaching 85% efficiency 10 days after application. For Dichelops melacanthus, the most effective combination was 100 g / ha of thiamethoxam with 90 g / ha of fenpropathrin, with Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, pp. 37 / 45 32 / 37 highlights the efficiency of 74% at 6 days after application and 65% at 15 days.

[0091] The performance observed in the efficacy tests is directly linked to the formulation's behavior at the molecular and colloidal levels. Factors such as the average size of the dispersed particles, the surface tension of the mixture, the equilibrium between continuous and dispersed phases, and the residence time of the active ingredients on the plant surface decisively influenced the contact and action of the insecticides on the biological targets. A formulation with poor dispersion or colloidal instability would have led to irregular deposition and a reduction in residual action time, compromising control rates.

[0092] Furthermore, the interaction of the components with the external environment, such as spray water, plant epicuticular wax, and insect fluids, depends on the physicochemical form in which the system behaves after dilution. Controlling the interfacial properties and the hydrophilic-lipophilic balance of the adjuvants allowed the active ingredients to more efficiently reach their physiological targets within the insects, maintaining their activity for extended periods, which was reflected in the efficiency percentages even in late evaluations, such as at 10 and 14 days after application.

[0093] The observed results reflected the formulation as a whole, that is, the strategically chosen components and their concentrations. The way in which the formulation was obtained also had a direct influence.

[0094] It should be understood that the present description does not limit the application to the details described herein and that the invention is capable of other embodiments and of being practiced or performed in a variety of ways, within the scope of the claims. Although specific terms have been used, such terms should be interpreted in a generic and descriptive sense, and not for the purpose of limitation. Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, pp. 38 / 45 33 / 37 PHYSICO-CHEMICAL IMPACT OF ADJUVANTS IN FORMULATION

[0095] The efficacy tests performed with the insecticide formulation were accompanied by a new round of physicochemical analyses, specifically conducted to corroborate and explain the observed agronomic results. Although the physicochemical parameters had already been previously determined, these additional evaluations focused on directly comparing the complete formulation, containing the adjuvants, with the basic formulation, without these components. The data revealed that the presence of the adjuvants provided substantial improvements in aspects such as suspension stability, viscosity, spreadability, foliar adhesion, and residual persistence, all crucial for ensuring efficient application and prolonging insecticidal activity in the field.

[0096] Re-evaluation of these parameters clearly demonstrated that the adjuvants (including calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate, ethoxylated castor oil, Break Thru DA 655, acrylic copolymer, and pyrogenic silica) conferred superior characteristics to the formulation, resulting in greater homogeneity, better foliar coverage, and greater retention of the active ingredients. This synergy was decisive for the improved performance in controlling Euschistus heros and Dichelops melacanthus, thus justifying the superior efficacy of the complete formulation compared to the basic one, as detailed in Table 9 below.

[0097] Table 9: Comparison between the physicochemical parameters and agronomic efficiency of the complete insecticide formulation (with adjuvants) and the basic formulation (without adjuvants) in stability, application and pest control in soybean cultivation. Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, pp. 39 / 45 34 / 37 Evaluated Parameter Unit Complete Formulation (with adjuvants) Basic Formulation (without adjuvants) Relative Difference (%) Chemical Explanation and Impact on Efficacy Suspension Stability Sedimentation (cm / 24h) 0.5 3.5 -85.7% Dispersants and emulsifier prevented sedimentation, ensuring a homogeneous suspension and uniform application. Viscosity Seconds 24.4 16.0 +52.5% Pyrogenic silica adjusted the viscosity to prevent runoff, increasing the contact time with the target. Spreadability Contact Angle (°) 35 62 -43.5% Ethoxylated castor oil reduced the angle, improving coverage of the leaf surface. Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, pages 40 / 45 35 / 37 Leaf Adhesion % Retention 92% 65% +41.5% The stabilized emulsion favored adhesion, reducing losses due to runoff and evaporation. Residual Persistence Days 14 8 +75% Acrylic copolymer and dispersants prolonged the product's permanence on the leaves. Control Efficiency (E. heros) - 2 DAA % Mortality 78% 54% +44.4% Adjuvants favored absorption and rapid spreading of the active ingredients. Control Efficiency (E. heros) - 10 DAA % Mortality 85% 60% +41.7% Formulation stability maintained prolonged action even after 10 days. Control Efficiency (E. heros) - 14 DAA % Mortality 73% 50% +46% Persistence and adhesion improved long-term control. Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, pp. 41 / 45 36 / 37 Control efficiency (D. melacanthus) 2 DAA % Mortality 73% 50% +46% Excellent coverage and rapid action ensured early mortality. Control efficiency (D. melacanthus) 6 DAA % Mortality 74% 48% +54% Uniform dispersion resulted in effective action against adults as well. Control efficiency (D. melacanthus) 10 DAA % Mortality 58% 40% +45% Copolymer ensured prolonged residual effect even under adverse environmental conditions. Control efficiency (D. melacanthus) 15 DAA % Mortality 65% ​​42% +54.8% Excellent retention and stable formulation maintained efficacy for up to 15 days after application.

[0098] Based on the results obtained, it became evident that the insecticide formulation developed, when composed of the selected adjuvants, showed superior performance in both physical parameters. Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, pages 42 / 45 37 / 37 chemical and agronomic efficacy. The improvement in suspension stability, viscosity, spreadability, and foliar retention directly contributed to a more efficient and longer-lasting application of the product on plants. These optimized physicochemical characteristics favored greater availability and persistence of the active ingredients on the treated surfaces, which translated into higher control rates of the pests *Euschistus heros* and *Dichelops melacanthus*. The synergy between the active ingredients and adjuvants not only potentiated the insecticidal action but also reduced losses due to runoff or evaporation, ensuring more effective and consistent protection over time. These data technically support the viability of this formulation as an advanced agronomic solution for disease control in soybean crops. Petition 870260008022, dated 01 / 28 / 2026, pages 43 / 45

Claims

1 / 10 CLAIMS 1. INSECTICIDE FORMULATION, characterized in that it comprises the following components: (a) thiamethoxam; (b) fenpropathrin; (c) hydrophobic pyrogenic silica treated with dichlorodimethylsilane; and (d) an oil.

2. FORMULATION, according to claim 1, characterized in that said components of the insecticidal formulation are present in the following concentrations, in mass percentage by volume (% m / V): (a) 5 to 30% of thiamethoxam; (b) 5 to 30% of fenpropathrin; (c) 0.5 to 8% of hydrophobic pyrogenic silica treated with dichlorodimethylsilane; and (d) 30 to 70% of oil.

3. FORMULATION, according to claim 1, characterized in that said components of the insecticidal formulation are present in the following concentrations, in mass percentage per volume (% m / V): (a) 10 to 25% of thiamethoxam; (b) 10 to 25% of fenpropathrin; (c) 1 to 5% of hydrophobic pyrogenic silica treated with dichlorodimethylsilane; and (d) 45 to 60% of oil. Petition 870250051250, dated 06 / 18 / 2025, page 45 / 57 2 / 10 4. FORMULATION, according to claim 1, characterized in that said components of the insecticidal formulation are present in the following concentrations, in mass percentage by volume (% m / V): (a) 21% of thiamethoxam; (b) 18% of fenpropathrin; (c) 2% of hydrophobic pyrogenic silica treated with dichlorodimethylsilane; and (d) 56% of oil.

5. FORMULATION, according to any one of claims 1 to 4, characterized in that the oil is refined biodiesel based on soybean methyl esters.

6. FORMULATION, according to any one of claims 1 to 5, characterized in that it additionally comprises the following components: (e) calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate; (f) ethoxylated castor oil comprising 35 to 40 mol of ethylene glycol (EO); (g) a polyether phosphate; and (h) an acrylic copolymer solution.

7. FORMULATION, according to claim 6, characterized in that the additional components are present in the insecticidal formulation in the following concentrations, in mass percentage by volume (% m / V): (e) 0.6 to 6% of calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate; Petition 870250051250, dated 06 / 18 / 2025, page 46 / 57 3 / 10 (f) 0.3 to 4% of ethoxylated castor oil comprising 35 to 40 mol of ethylene glycol (EO); (g) 0.5 to 8% of polyether phosphate; and (h) 0.3 to 4% of acrylic copolymer solution.

8. FORMULATION, according to claim 6, characterized in that the additional components are present in the insecticidal formulation in the following concentrations, in mass percentage by volume (% m / V): (e) 1.5 to 4% calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate; (f) 0.6 to 2% ethoxylated castor oil comprising 35 to 40 mol of ethylene glycol (EO); (g) 1 to 5% polyether phosphate; and (h) 0.6 to 2% acrylic copolymer solution.

9. FORMULATION, according to claim 6, characterized in that the additional components are present in the insecticidal formulation in the following concentrations, in mass percentage by volume (% m / V): (e) 2.7% calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate; (f) 1.3% ethoxylated castor oil comprising 35 to 40 mol of ethylene glycol (EO); (g) 2% polyether phosphate; and (h) 1% acrylic copolymer solution.

10. PRODUCTION PROCESS of the insecticide formulation, as defined in any one of claims 1 to 9, characterized in that it comprises the following steps: Petition 870250051250, dated 06 / 18 / 2025, page 47 / 57 4 / 10 (a) in a formulation tank, add the oil and start stirring; (b) add fenpropathrin to the oil and stir; obtaining a first mixture; (c) add calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate to the first mixture and stir; obtaining a second mixture; (d) add ethoxylated castor oil comprising 35 to 40 mol of ethylene glycol (EO) to the second mixture and stir; obtaining a third mixture; (e) add polyether phosphate to the third mixture and stir; obtaining a fourth mixture; (f) add acrylic copolymer solution to the fourth mixture and stir; obtaining a fifth mixture; (g) add thiamethoxam to the fifth mixture and stir; obtaining a sixth mixture;(h) add hydrophobic pyrogenic silica treated with dichlorodimethyl silane to the sixth mixture and stir; obtaining a seventh mixture; (i) subject the seventh mixture to grinding; obtaining a particulate mixture comprising particles; and (j) subject the particulate mixture to particle size monitoring and mesh testing, and make decision (1) or (2), said decisions being: (1) if the particle size consists of a value outside the range between 4 and 7 micrometers and there is retention on 325 mesh, repeat step (i) above; or (2) if the particle size consists of a value within the range between 4 and 7 micrometers and there is no retention on 325 mesh, the insecticidal formulation is obtained. Petition 870250051250, dated 06 / 18 / 2025, p. 48 / 57 5 / 10; 11. PROCESS, according to claim 10, characterized in that the agitations are carried out at speeds between 200 and 600 rpm.

12. PROCESS, according to claim 10, characterized in that the agitations are carried out at speeds between 250 and 400 rpm.

13. PROCESS, according to claim 10, characterized in that the agitations are carried out at speeds of 300 rpm.

14. PROCESS, according to any one of claims 10 to 13, characterized in that the agitation of steps (a) and (b) is carried out at a temperature of 35 to 65 °C; and the agitation of steps (c) to (h) is carried out at a temperature of 18 to 30 °C.

15. PROCESS, according to any one of claims 10 to 13, characterized in that the agitation of steps (a) and (b) is carried out at a temperature of 45 to 55 °C; and the agitation of steps (c) to (h) is carried out at a temperature of 18 to 30 °C.

16. PROCESS, according to any one of claims 10 to 13, characterized in that the agitation of steps (a) and (b) is carried out at a temperature of 50°C; and the agitation of steps (c) to (h) is carried out at a temperature of 20°C.

17. PROCESS, according to any one of claims 10 to 16, characterized in that the agitations are carried out under the following conditions: - agitation in steps (b), (c), (d), (e), (f) and (h) is carried out for 1 to 20 minutes; and - agitation in step (g) is carried out for 5 to 60 minutes. Petition 870250051250, dated 06 / 18 / 2025, p. 49 / 57 6 / 10 18. PROCESS, according to any one of claims 10 to 16, characterized in that the agitations are carried out under the following conditions: - agitation in steps (b), (c), (d), (e), (f) and (h) is carried out for 5 to 15 minutes; and - agitation in step (g) is carried out for 15 to 40 minutes.

19. PROCESS, according to any one of claims 10 to 16, characterized in that the agitations are carried out under the following conditions: - agitation in steps (b), (c), (d), (e), (f) and (h) is carried out for 10 minutes; and - agitation in step (g) is carried out for 20 minutes.

20. PROCESS, according to any one of claims 10 to 19, characterized in that the components are added in amounts (% m / V) described below: - in step (a) the oil is added in amounts of 30 to 70%; - in step (b) fenpropathrin is added in amounts of 5 to 30%; - in step (c) calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate is added in amounts of 0.6 to 6%; - in step (d) ethoxylated castor oil comprising 35 to 40 mol of ethylene glycol (EO) is added in amounts of 0.3 to 4%; - in step (e) polyether phosphate is added in amounts of 0.5 to 8%; Petition 870250051250, dated 06 / 18 / 2025, p. 50 / 57 7 / 10 - in step (f) the acrylic copolymer solution is added in amounts of 0.3 to 4%; - in step (g) thiamethoxam is added in amounts of 5 to 30%; and - in step (h) hydrophobic fumed silica treated with dichlorodimethylsilane is added in amounts of 0.5 to 8%.

21. PROCESS, according to any one of claims 10 to 19, characterized in that the components are added in amounts (% m / V) described below: - in step (a) the oil is added in amounts of 45 to 60%; - in step (b) fenpropathrin is added in amounts of 10 to 25%; - in step (c) calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate is added in amounts of 1.5 to 4%; - in step (d) ethoxylated castor oil comprising 35 to 40 mol of ethylene glycol (EO) is added in amounts of 0.6 to 2%; - in step (e) polyether phosphate is added in amounts of 1 to 5%; - in step (f) acrylic copolymer solution is added in amounts of 0.6 to 2%; - in step (g) thiamethoxam is added in amounts of 10 to 25%; and - in step (h) hydrophobic fumed silica treated with dichlorodimethylsilane is added in amounts of 1 to 5%. Petition 870250051250, dated 06 / 18 / 2025, page 51 / 57 8 / 10 22. PROCESS, according to any one of claims 10 to 19, characterized in that the components are added in amounts (% m / V) described below: - in step (a) the oil is added in amounts of 56%; - in step (b) fenpropathrin is added in amounts of 18%; - in step (c) calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate is added in amounts of 2.7%; - in step (d) ethoxylated castor oil comprising 35 to 40 mol of ethylene glycol (EO) is added in amounts of 1.3%; - in step (e) polyether phosphate is added in amounts of 2%; - in step (f) acrylic copolymer solution is added in amounts of 1%; - in step (g) thiamethoxam is added in amounts of 21%; and - in step (h) hydrophobic pyrogenic silica treated with dichlorodimethyl silane is added in quantities of 2%.

23. PROCESS, according to any one of claims 10 to 22, characterized in that in step (i) the grinding is carried out in a laboratory-scale vertical immersion bead mill, an industrial-scale horizontal bead mill or an industrial-scale vertical immersion bead mill, said grinding being carried out at a temperature between 13 and 37 °C.

24. PROCESS, according to any one of claims 10 to 22, characterized in that in step (i) the grinding is carried out in a laboratory-scale vertical immersion bead mill, Petition 870250051250, dated 06 / 18 / 2025, p. 52 / 57 9 / 10 industrial-scale horizontal bead mill or industrial-scale vertical immersion bead mill, said grinding being carried out at a temperature between 15 and 30 °C.

25. PROCESS, according to any one of claims 10 to 22, characterized in that in step (i) the grinding is carried out in a laboratory-scale vertical immersion bead mill, an industrial-scale horizontal bead mill or an industrial-scale vertical immersion bead mill, said grinding being carried out at a temperature of 25 °C.

26. PROCESS, according to any one of claims 23 to 25, characterized in that when the mill used in step (i) is the laboratory-scale vertical immersion bead mill, the grinding is carried out for 1 hour, and the grinding must be carried out for another 1 hour, and so on, until the particles of the particulate mixture meet the parameters defined in step (j).

27. PROCESS, according to any one of claims 23 to 25, characterized in that when the mill used in step (i) is the industrial-scale horizontal bead mill, the grinding is carried out in cycles of random duration previously chosen by an operator, the number of cycles being that which is sufficient to meet the size and retention parameters defined in step (j).

28. PROCESS, according to any one of claims 23 to 25, characterized in that when the mill used in step (i) is an industrial-scale vertical immersion bead mill, the grinding is carried out for 1 hour, and the grinding must be carried out for additional 30-minute cycles if the parameters defined in step (j) are not achieved in the first 1-hour cycle, and the additional cycles will be carried out in the quantities necessary for the parameters defined in step (j) to be achieved. Petition 870250051250, dated 06 / 18 / 2025, pp. 53 / 57 10 / 10 29. USE of the insecticidal formulation, as defined in any one of claims 1 to 9, characterized in that it is for the control of selected pests from the group comprising Anthonomus grandis, Anticarsia gemmatalis, Bemisia tabaci, Deois flavopicta, Diabrotica speciosa, Diaphorina citri, Dichelops furcatus, Dichelops melacanthus, Diloboderus abderus, Enneothrips enigmaticus, Enneothrips flavens, Euetheola humilis, Euschistus heros, Frankliniella schultzei, Frankliniella williamsi, Helicoverpa zeae, Heterotermes tenuis, Leptocybe invasa, Leucoptera coffeella, Mahanarva fimbriolata, Mahanarva spp, Myzus persicae, Nezara viridula, Oebalus poecilus, Oncometopia facialis, Phyllophaga cuiabana, Piezodorus guildinii, Quesada gigas, Rachiplusia nu, Rhopalosiphum graminum, Scaptocoris castânea, Sphenophorus levis, Spodopotera albula, Spodopotera frugiperda, Spodoptera cosmiodes or Spodoptera eridania.

30. USE, according to claim 29, characterized in that the pests are present in selected crops of the group comprising cotton, peanuts, rice, potatoes, sugarcane, citrus, eucalyptus, beans, corn, pastures, soybeans, sorghum, wheat, tomatoes or coffee.

31. PEST CONTROL METHOD, said pests being Euschistos heros (brown stink bug) in soybeans, said method being characterized by the fact that it comprises a single application of the insecticide formulation, as defined in any one of claims 1 to 9, said application being at the pest site, said application being at the application site of said formulation, the doses of the active ingredients during the application of said formulation being 105 to 126 g / ha of thiamethoxam and 90 to 108 g / ha of fenpropathrin. Petition 870250051250, dated 06 / 18 / 2025, pp. 54 / 57

Images