Phytosanitary composition of herbicides in the form of a microemulsion with low surfactant content, high compatibility in ultra-low volume spray solutions and method of obtaining the composition.

Abstract

A phytosanitary composition of herbicides in microemulsion form, with low surfactant content, high compatibility in ultra-low volume spray solutions, and a method for obtaining the composition.

Description

"Phytosanitary composition of herbicides in the form of a microemulsion with low surfactant content, high compatibility in ultra-low volume spray solutions and method of obtaining the composition." STATE OF THE ART OF THE INVENTION The present invention relates to the field of products and active ingredients for pest control, preferably for agricultural application, and more specifically, it relates to microemulsion (ME) herbicide formulations that include an active ingredient selected from 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), 3,6-dichloro-2-methoxybenzoic acid (Dicamba), 5-(2-chloro-α,α,α-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy)-N-methylsulfonyl-2-nitrobenzamide (Fomesafen) and Ethyl O[5-(2-chloro-α,α,α-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy)-2-nitrobenzoyl]-DL-lactate (Lactofen). The active ingredient is found in its dissolved form in a solvent that acts as a compatibilizing agent, which implies a series of agronomic advantages that will be developed in the present application.In effect, the excessive use of surfactants in the compositions of the prior art is thus overcome, advantageously using, with the formulation of the application, the solvent that will be described in detail below, which, in turn, fulfills the function of acting as a compatibilizing agent, thereby improving the performance of the active ingredient in the formulations of the invention or in solutions obtained from them. Description of the state of the art Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 10 / 264 2 / 73 Herbicide resistance is defined as the inherited ability of a weed to survive a dose of herbicide that would normally provide effective control. In Argentina, there are 36 biotypes and 20 species of weeds resistant to herbicides such as glyphosate; selective post-emergence graminicides; imidazolinones, sulfonylureas, and triazolopyrimidines, as well as hormonal herbicides. The practice of mixing one or more herbicides in the spray solution is common and has many advantages compared to using each product separately, resulting in an increased spectrum of action and a reduced likelihood of new resistance development. However, mixing the products may cause undesirable effects due to physical and / or chemical incompatibilities. Physical incompatibility is caused by the formulation of the products and their interactions, resulting in the formation of precipitates, phase separation, formation of solid macroparticles, or clogging of spray tablets, among other issues. This leads to the total loss of activity or a reduction in the activity of the active ingredients, underdosing or overdosing of the application dose, the impossibility of application, or application at a higher cost. Among these incompatibilities, the best known are those involving the herbicide glyphosate and hormonal products such as 2,4-D and dicamba, fomesafen and lactofen, or others from the triazine group, such as atrazine. These mixtures are widely used in production, since the herbicide glyphosate is the most widely used worldwide, hence the generation of resistance. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 11 / 264 3 / 73 was high, requiring it to be mixed with other products to ensure weed control. Seeking new alternatives to improve control, the use of pre-emergent herbicides has increased significantly. Because of this, tank mixtures have gone from two products in most cases to three or more products, resulting in an increase in the concentration of formulated products and worsening stability conditions. Another important aspect to consider regarding physical incompatibilities is the volume of water used to make the tank mixture. As the volume increases, compatibility improves; for example, if volumes of 80 l / ha, which is a maximum volume used in the field for herbicides, are increased, incompatibilities are reduced in most cases. However, if this volume is reduced, the mixture becomes more incompatible because there is greater interaction between the components. The use of smaller volumes of water in the solution is motivated by multiple factors: scarcity of resources, difficulty of access, and application economy or application techniques where aerial application uses low volumes, such as, in extreme cases, 10 l / ha (liters per hectare). The examples provided below in this application are only a small portion of the mixtures used in the field, where more often than not the mixture conditions worsen, causing greater instability. Compositions of 2,4-D and Dicamba in acidic form formulated as a microemulsion are known. Among the closest known documents from the inventors are patent documents US 6803345 B2, US 7094735 B2 and applications. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 12 / 264 4 / 73 published US 2011 / 0281731 and US 2014 / 0005052 A1 are specifically mentioned. US patent 6803345 B2 refers to a microemulsion-forming concentrate that includes, among many other active ingredients, 2,4-D and Dicamba in acidic form. The patent reveals, as an essential aspect, the absence of organic solvents and water in the concentrate. It also refers to the fact that the concentrate contains the active ingredient and a surfactant in high proportions. US patent 7094735 B2 refers to a microemulsion that, among several active ingredients, includes 2,4-D and Dicamba in acidic form. The microemulsion disclosed in this document necessarily includes an acidifying agent, since said component is necessary to raise the pH to the pKa of the active ingredient used. Both of the aforementioned documents are primarily based on the use of surfactant (emulsifier) ​​as a solvent. The publication of US patent application 2011 / 0281731 describes an emulsifiable concentrate comprising a herbicide, a solvent, a mixture of emulsifiers, a co-solvent, and water. The document further describes that the organic solvents also perform a secondary antifreeze and antigelling function. This document describes an emulsifiable concentrate that can be defined as typical. US patent application 2014 / 0005052 A1 describes a microemulsion comprising a herbicide in its acidic form, a polar cosolvent, at least one nonionic surfactant, at least one anionic surfactant, and water. The document also describes the function of the anionic and nonionic thermoactive agents as follows: Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 13 / 264 5 / 73 solvents. This application is technologically of the type of formulations in US documents 6803345 B2 and US 7094735 B2, except that it is a microemulsion (ME), rather than a microemulsion forming concentrate (MFC), in which a high quantity of surfactants is used. This application differs fundamentally from previous ones in that it provides a new formulation, both in its components and their percentage, which allows, among other things, the replacement of the excessive use of surfactants with a higher quality solvent, which, in turn, acts as a compatibilizing agent, improving the product's performance in the solution. In previous patents and applications, a leading role is assigned to the surfactant, or a mixture containing it, in which, in general, 4 to 6 times the quantity required in the present application is used. Although pH is an important factor in the previous technique, for example, between 1.9 and 3.4 depending on the active substance, this fact represents an unnecessary risk for operators, applicators, and all agents involved in the chain, from production to field application. On the other hand, although surfactants are products of low toxicity, they should be handled with the same precautions as any herbicide. Their use in high concentrations can cause damage to crops, in addition to the fact that, when used in high concentrations, they add an extra cost that is desirable to avoid. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 14 / 264 6 / 73 It is therefore an objective of the present invention to provide a novel composition of a formulated plant protection product that allows for ultra-low volume applications, being 100% compatible with other formulations on the market. The invention is formed as a microemulsion with an active ingredient selected from 2,4-D, dicamba, fomesafen, or lactofen. It is also an objective of the present invention to provide a herbicide phytosanitary composition in the form of a microemulsion in which the active ingredient, for example 2,4-D, Dicamba, Fomesafen or Lactofen, does not need to be modified to achieve greater solubility in the formula. It is also an objective of the present invention to provide a herbicidal phytosanitary composition in the form of a microemulsion that provides greater bioavailability and bioefficacy of the active ingredient, since physical and chemical losses in the formation of the solution are minimized, during and after spraying. It is also an objective of the present invention to provide a herbicidal phytosanitary composition in the form of a microemulsion that exhibits physicochemical compatibility in tank mixtures with other formulations due to the designed compatibilizing solvent of the invention. It is also an objective of the present invention to provide a herbicidal phytosanitary composition in the form of a microemulsion that has a novel solvent acting in the formula at the same time as a compatibilizing agent. It is also an objective of the present invention to provide a herbicidal phytosanitary composition in the form of a microemulsion that generates a much smaller environmental impact due to a lower dose / use per hectare of the active ingredient, thus generating less residue in crops. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 15 / 264 7 / 73 It is also an objective of the present invention to provide a herbicidal phytosanitary composition in the form of a microemulsion that allows for reduced application costs by decreasing the volume of solution required to be applied per hectare. It is also an objective of the present invention to provide a herbicidal phytosanitary composition in the form of a microemulsion that uses a solvent, which also functions as a compatibilizing agent, at the expense of an overload of surfactants, thus achieving a reduction of 50-70%, as described in prior art documents, to a minimum value of 7-12% in the present application. It is also an objective of the present invention to provide compositions of the herbicides 2,4-D, Dicamba, Fomesafen or Lactofen, which, when their components, such as surfactant and solvent, are combined in appropriate amounts, impart the desired properties to the formulation. It is also an objective of the present invention to provide a herbicidal phytosanitary composition in the form of a microemulsion which, by comprising the use of the solvent / compatibilizing agent combined with the surfactant in defined quantities, achieves a formulation whose improved properties allow obtaining a composition that shows the characteristics described above. It is still an objective of the present invention to provide a microemulsion (ME) composition that is highly compatible in spray solutions, even in ultra-low volume applications, wherein the composition comprises: Dimethylaminopropalamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids 35-45% w / v; Coconut Fatty Amine Ethoxylate 7-12% w / v; Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 16 / 264 8 / 73 Ethanol 6-9% w / v; Water 20-30% w / v; Active ingredient 10-40% w / v; the aforementioned active ingredient being selected from 2,4-D, Dicamba, Fomesafen and Lactofen. It is also an objective of the present invention to provide a method for preparing the composition of the invention, wherein the method comprises the steps of: - Charge the theoretical quantity of coconut fatty amine ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide in the stirring tank, - Add, while stirring, all the desired amount of ethanol until homogeneous, - Add, while stirring, half the desired amount of water until homogeneous. - Add, while stirring, the desired total quantity of saturated and unsaturated fatty acid dimethylaminopropalamide and stir until complete dissolution is achieved and a crystalline solution is obtained. - Charge, under agitation, the total desired quantity of a selected active ingredient of 2,4-D, Dicamba, Fomesafen or Lactofen, and stir until complete dissolution is achieved and a crystalline solution is obtained, - Add, while stirring, the remaining water desired in the formula, until homogeneity and the final volume are achieved, and - Filter the solution that is being homogenized. It is also an objective of the present invention to provide a tank mixture that includes any of the compositions of the invention in which, as a complementary agrochemical component, glyphosate, picloram, atrazine, sulfentrazone, chloransulam, Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 17 / 264 9 / 73 mepiquat, paraquat, imazapyr, imazapic, imazetapyr, or mixtures thereof, are used. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION Now, referring in detail to the composition of the invention, it can be noted that the invention provides a new phytosanitary composition formulated as a microemulsion, which is stable due to the development of a designed solvent / compatibilizing agent that keeps the active ingredient, such as 2,4-D, Dicamba, Fomesafen, or Lactofen, completely solubilized and protected, conferring the particular characteristics that are the subject of the invention mentioned above. More specifically, the composition of the present invention comprises: 35-45% dimethylaminopropalamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids (DPAG) as solvent / compatibilizing agent, 7-12% coconut fatty amine ethoxylate as surfactant, 6-9% ethanol as diluent, 20-30% water as a carrier, and 10-30% of an active ingredient selected from among 2,4-D, Dicamba, Fomesafen, and Lactofen. The percentages mentioned above are expressed as % w / v, in relation to the total formulation. The general and physicochemical characteristics of each of the components used in the formulation of the present invention are detailed below. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 18 / 264 10 / 73 The compound used as a solvent, which constitutes an essential component in the formulation of the invention, is a dimethylaminopropalamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids, corresponding to the following formula: CH, where R is a saturated and / or unsaturated fatty acid selected from the group consisting of caproic acid, capric acid, myristic acid, palmitoleic acid, stearic acid, linoleic acid, caprylic acid, lauric acid, palmitic acid, arachidic acid, oleic acid. Preferably, the fatty acids are obtained from at least soybean oil, coconut oil, sunflower oil, cottonseed oil, or a combination thereof. The soybean oil-based solvent preferably has a pH between 10.8 and 11.8, a density at 20°C between 0.895 and 0.905 g / cm3, and a refractive index at 20°C between 1.468 and 1.472. The oil can also be coconut oil, with the solvent having a pH between 10.4 and 11.7, a density at 20°C between 0.87 and 0.89 g / cm3, and a refractive index at 20°C between 1.439 and 1.445. The solvent in question may also consist of a mixture of 30% soybean oil and 70% coconut oil, which has a pH between 10.5 and 11.4, a density at 20°C between 0.87-0.89 g / cm3 and a refractive index at 20°C between 1.439-1.445. 1) Dimethylaminopropalamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids: Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 19 / 264 11 / 73 Physical state: liquid above 20°C, below that temperature it is a waxy amber-colored solid. Odor: characteristic of amines. Color: amber to dark caramel. pH value: 11.7-12.9 at 20°C. Melting point: 20°C, Flammability: Non-flammable, Density: 0.90 g / cm3 (20°C) Solubility in water: emulsifies, Free amines < 4 meq / g. Refractive index = 1.472 2) Coconut Fatty Amine Ethoxylate, 15 mol EO: Physical state: liquid above 25°C, pH: alkaline, Amine value: 55-75, HLB: 15, 43, Maximum humidity <1%, of this 3) Ethanol: Appearance: clear, colorless liquid Odor: Characteristic, Boiling point: 78.5°C Melting point: -114.1°C Flash point: 13°, Automatic ignition temperature: 425°C. Vapor Pressure: (20°C) 59 mbar, Density (20 / 4): 0.804 Solubility: miscible with water. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 20 / 264 12 / 73 The active ingredient used in the invention's formulation, which is selected from 2,4-D, Dicamba, Fomesafen, and Lactofen, is used without modifying its chemical structure, since it is completely soluble in the engineering solvent / compatibilizing agent, even in its acidic form, and in turn the resulting formula is water-soluble. For this reason, it is not necessary to salify it to subsequently make it water-soluble, nor to esterify it by reaction with alcohols, in order to later incorporate the new molecule thus modified into conventional emulsions. Because the active ingredient is completely solubilized in the solvent of the invention, it does not have appreciable exchanges with the cations present in hard water, nor does it compete with the cations of the salts of other agrochemicals added to the tank mix solution. This quality makes it highly compatible with other agrochemicals and water, preventing the waste of agrochemicals in the solution due to precipitation, generating new insoluble salts, and preventing these salts from clogging the spray nozzles. All of the above means an improvement in the overall performance of the applied solution. This property is particularly desirable and effective in ultra-low volume (ULV) applications where, due to scarce water resources, aerial applications, or simply optimizing the application, low volumes of water are used in the solution.The active ingredients that can be used in tank mixtures with the formulations of the present invention include glyphosate, picloram, atrazine, sulfentrazone, chloransulam, mepiquat, paraquat, imazapyr, imazapic, imazethapyr, or mixtures thereof. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the preferred use of glyphosate will be illustrated below. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 21 / 264 13 / 73 The particular combination of solvent / compatibilizing agent and surfactant allows for a stable microemulsion that enables greater agronomic efficiency, as it remains stable even at very demanding dilutions, achieving micelles smaller than 50 nanometers. In turn, this mixture minimizes physicochemical losses such as photolysis, hydrolysis, drift, rebound, rolling, fragmentation, or adhesion. In addition to the characteristics described above, the composition has greater penetration, which is inherent to its microemulsion form. Because the active ingredient is in an acidic form, signifying greater biological activity than salts and esters, and because it contains an engineered solvent that acts as a compatibilizing agent, reducing the loss of the active ingredient, there is a decrease in the amount of active substance needed for weed control compared to products of the previous technique. To demonstrate the advantages described above, the following tests were carried out using the formulation that is the subject of the invention, comparing them with conventional commercial products that are commonly used in the market. The results obtained demonstrate that the formulation proposed in the present invention is beneficial, since the proposed objectives are effectively achieved. The preferred formulation, according to the invention, is detailed below, in which the active ingredient 2,4-D is microemulsified in its acidic form: 30% w / v of 2,4-D in acidic form, 37% w / v of dimethylaminopropalamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids, 7% w / v Ethanol, Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 22 / 264 14 / 73 11.0% w / v of Coconut Fatty Amine Ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide, and 22.0% w / v water. The preferred formulation according to the invention is detailed below, in which the active ingredient Dicamba is microemulsified in its acidic form: 20% w / v of Dicamba in acid form, 42% w / v of dimethylaminopropalamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids, 8% w / v Ethanol, 8% w / v of Coconut Fatty Amine Ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide, and 28% w / v water. The preferred formulation according to the invention is detailed below, in which the active ingredient Fomesafen is microemulsified in its acidic form: 12.5% ​​w / v of Fomesafen in acid form, 45.0% w / v of dimethylaminopropalamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids, 8.0% w / v Ethanol, 9.0% w / v of Coconut Fatty Amine Ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide, and 28.0% w / v water. Finally, the preferred formulation according to the invention is detailed below, in which the active ingredient Lactofen is microemulsified in its acidic form: Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 23 / 264 15 / 73 15% w / v of Lactofen in acidic form, 43% w / v of dimethylaminopropalamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids, 7% w / v Ethanol, 8% w / v of Coconut Fatty Amine Ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide, and 28% w / v water. Example 1 Obtaining preferred formulations 1. General characterization of the process: The formulation process was carried out under batch modalities (batch of 10000 L). - 1100 kg of Coconut Fatty Amine Ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide were loaded into the stirring tank. - Under agitation, 700 kg of the ethanol indicated in the formula were added until homogeneity was achieved. - Under agitation, 1100 kg of water were added until homogeneity was achieved. - Under agitation, 3700 kg of dimethylaminopropalamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids were loaded and stirred until complete dissolution and obtaining a crystalline solution. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 24 / 264 16 / 73 - Under agitation, 3000 kg of the active substance 2,4-D were loaded and stirred until complete dissolution and a crystalline solution was obtained. - Under agitation, 1100 kg of water were added until homogeneity and the final volume were achieved. The product underwent filtration and quality control, and once approved, was released for packaging. 2. Description of the equipment used: The following equipment, constructed of stainless steel, was used: Mixing tank, Centrifugal pump, Finished product storage tank. Packaging machines. 3. Description of the conditions that were controlled during the process: - Dissolution temperature of the active substance, not exceeding 45°C. - Final density of the mixture, which remained within the parameters of 1.050 - 1.100 g / ml at 20°C, The final pH of the mixture was maintained within the parameter of 5.4-5.9 The final color of the mixture is crystalline amber. Obtaining the preferred formulations Example 2 Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 25 / 264 17 / 73 1. General characterization of the process: The formulation process was carried out under batch modalities (batch of 10000 L). - 800 kg of Coconut Fatty Amine Ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide were loaded into the stirring tank. - Under agitation, 800 kg of the ethanol indicated in the formula were added until homogeneity was achieved. - Under agitation, 1400 kg of water were added until homogeneity was achieved. - Under agitation, 4200 kg of dimethylaminopropalamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids were loaded and stirred until complete dissolution and obtaining a crystalline solution. - Under agitation, 2000 kg of the active substance Dicamba were loaded and stirred until complete dissolution and a crystalline solution was obtained. - Under agitation, 1400 kg of water were added until homogeneity and the final volume were achieved. The product underwent filtration and quality control, and once approved, was released for packaging. 2. Description of the equipment used: Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 26 / 264 18 / 73 The following equipment, constructed of stainless steel, was used: Mixing tank, Centrifugal pump, Finished product storage tank. Packaging machines. 3. Description of the conditions that were controlled during the process: - Dissolution temperature of the active substance, not exceeding 45°C. - Final density of the mixture, which remained within the parameters of 1.060 - 1.080 g / ml at 20°C, The final pH of the mixture was maintained within the parameter of 4.6-5.0 The final color of the mixture is crystalline amber. Example 3 Obtaining preferred formulations 1. General characterization of the process: The formulation process was carried out under batch modalities (batch of 10000 L). - 900 kg of Coconut Fatty Amine Ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide were loaded into the stirring tank. - Under agitation, 800 kg of the ethanol indicated in the formula were added until homogeneity was achieved. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 27 / 264 19 / 73 - Under agitation, 1400 kg of water were added until homogeneity was achieved. - Under agitation, 4500 kg of dimethylaminopropalamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids were loaded and stirred until complete dissolution and obtaining a crystalline solution. - Under agitation, 1250 kg of the active substance Fomesafen were loaded and stirred until complete dissolution and a crystalline solution was obtained. - Under agitation, 1400 kg of water were added until homogeneity and the final volume were achieved. The product underwent filtration and quality control, and once approved, was released for packaging. 2. Description of the equipment used: The following equipment, constructed of stainless steel, was used: Mixing tank, Centrifugal pump, Finished product storage tank. Packaging machine. 3. Description of the conditions that were controlled during the process: Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 28 / 264 20 / 73 - Dissolution temperature of the active substance, not exceeding 45°C. - Final density of the mixture, which remained within the parameters of 1.035 - 1.044 g / ml at 20°C, The final pH of the mixture was maintained within the parameter of 6.5-7.5 The final color of the mixture is crystalline amber. Example 4 Obtaining the preferred formulations 1. General characterization of the process: The formulation process was carried out under batch mode (10000L batch). - In the mixing tank, 800 kg of Coconut Fatty Amine Ethoxylate were loaded with 15 moles of ethylene oxide. - Under agitation, 700 kg of the ethanol indicated in the formula were added until homogeneity was achieved. - Under agitation, 1400 kg of water were added until homogeneity was achieved. - Under agitation, 4300 kg of dimethylaminopropalamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids were loaded and stirred until complete dissolution and obtaining a crystalline solution. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 29 / 264 21 / 73 - Under agitation, 1500 kg of the active ingredient Lactofen were loaded and stirred until complete dissolution and a crystalline solution was obtained. - Under agitation, 1400 kg of water were added until homogeneity and the final volume were achieved. The product underwent filtration and quality control, and once approved, was released for packaging. 2. Description of the equipment used: The following equipment, constructed of stainless steel, was used: Mixing tank, Centrifugal pump, Finished product storage tank. Packaging machines. 3. Description of the conditions that were controlled during the process: - Dissolution temperature of the active substance, not exceeding 45°C. - Final density of the mixture, which remained within the parameters of 1.035 - 1.045 g / ml at 20°C, The final pH of the mixture was maintained within the parameter of 6.5-7.5 The final color of the mixture is crystalline amber. Example 5 Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 30 / 264 22 / 73 The following tests show how the different microemulsion formulations of the invention control the target weeds, reducing the amount of active ingredient applied per hectare, and how they behave in tank mixtures. Active ingredient DPAG Amine Ethoxylate Coconut Fat Ethanol Water DERS1904 30 40 9 7 25 DERS1906 20 35 8 7 30 DERS1910 40 45 12 9 20 Materials and methods: The test was conducted in the field in the city of Sánchez Bs As (33°26'1,76S; 60°10'10,01W). In a Vertic Argiudoll, fine, illitic, thermal soil (USDA Soil Taxonomy V. 2006) with utilization capacity: II w. The experimental design used was a completely randomized block design (CRBD). Each treated plot was 2 m wide by 10 m long with paired controls and a buffer zone of 1 m wide by 10 m long. Each treatment was replicated 4 times. Three different 2,4-D microemulsion compositions were evaluated, namely DERS-1904, DERS-1906, and DERS-1910, as defined in the previous table. They were compared with three standard 2,4-D formulations, namely, 2,4-D choline salt 66.9% SL, 2,4-D 2-ethylhexyl ester 97% EC, and 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL, and a blank control without application. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 31 / 264 23 / 73 Each formulated product was evaluated with two label doses and two application volumes (40 L / ha and 80 L / ha). A dose of 2 L / ha of glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL was added to all treatments. Treatment Product Dose (l / ha) Volume (l / ha) 1 Blank control 0 80 2 DERS-1904 0.8 80 3 DERS-1904 1.2 80 4 DERS-1906 1.2 80 5 DERS-1906 1.8 80 6 DERS-1910 0.6 80 7 DERS-1910 0.9 80 8 2.4-d Choline Salt 66.9% SL 1.5 80 9 2.4-d Choline Salt 66.9% SL 2.5 80 10 2.4-D ethylhexyl 2-ester 97% EC 0.96 80 11 2.4-D ethylhexyl 2-ester 97% EC 1.4 80 12 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL 0.96 80 13 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL 1.4 80 Treatment Product Dose (l / ha) Volume (l / ha) 14 Control blank * 0 40 15 DERS-1904 * 0.8 40 16 DERS-1904 * 1.2 40 17 DERS-1906 * 1.2 40 18 DERS-1906 * 1.8 40 19 DERS-1910 * 0.6 40 20 DERS-1910 * 0.9 40 21 Choline salt 2,4-d 66.9% SL * 1.5 40 22 Choline salt 2,4-d 66.9% SL * 2.5 40 23 2,4-D 2-ethylhexyl ester 97% EC * 0.96 40 24 2,4-D 2-ethylhexyl ester 97% EC * 1.4 40 25 2,4-D salt 0.96 40 Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 32 / 264 24 / 73 dimethylamine 60% SL * 26 2,4-D salt dimethylamine 60% SL * 1.4 40 *These treatments were not applied because the products 2,4-D choline salt 66.9% SL, 2,4-D 2-ethylhexyl ester 97% EC, and 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL showed tank incompatibility when mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL at a volume of 40 L / ha. The herbicides were sprayed for full coverage on corn straw. For this purpose, a van with an adapted CO2 spray backpack and four flat fan tablets was provided. One flat fan tablet (TT110015) was used at 2 bar pressure and a peak spacing of 0.52 m. The average speed was 6.9 km / ha, and the droplet size achieved was medium (175-250 microns). The application was submitted on November 20, 2019. The phenological stage of Conyza bonariensis, "black branch," at the time of application was vegetative, with a height of 7 to 10 cm. The weather conditions were: T (°C) 28.2 RH (%) 56 *Δ T (°C) 6 Speed ​​(km / h) 5.5 The methodology used to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments in controlling the current weed was that proposed by ALAM at 7, 14, and 21 DAA (days after application). Result: Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 33 / 264 25 / 73 DDA Treatment Mean ± SE LSD Fisher p-value 7 1 0 ± 2.39 a <0.0001 2 22.5 ± 2.39 b 3 37.5 ± 2.39 cd 4 21.25 ± 2.39 b 5 37.5 ± 2.39 cd 6 23.75 ± 2.39 b 7 37.5 ± 2.39 cd 8 31.25 ± 2.39 bcd 9 40 ± 2.39 d 10 27.5 ± 2.39 bc 11 41.25 ± 2.39 d 12 21.25 ± 2.39 b 13 41.25 ± 2.39 d 14 10 42.125 ± 3.94 b 9 59, 25 ± 3.94 bc 10 53.125 ± 3.94 bc 11 63.875 ± 3.94 c 12 40, 25 ± 3.94 b 13 65 ± 3.94 c 21 1 0 ± 2.55 to <0.0001 2 85 ± 2.55 bc 3 96, 25 ± 2.55 c 4 85 ± 2.55 bc 5 91.125 ± 2.55 bc 6 84.05 ± 2.55 bc 7 90 ± 2.55 bc 8 81.5 ± 2.55 b 9 95 ± 2.55 c 10 86.5 ± 2.55 bc 11 95 ± 2.55 c 12 86.55 ± 2.55 bc 13 94.875 ± 2.55 c Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 34 / 264 26 / 73 Conclusions: During the three days of evaluation, there were significant differences between the absolute control (TA) and the treatments applied. During the three days of evaluation, significant differences were observed between the treatments applied, both in different doses of the same product and between different formulated products. Taking into account the minimum doses applied, the reduction in the amount of Active Ingredient per hectare ranged from 50% to 65%, achieving similar, equal or greater control of the three types of formulations (DERS-1904, DERS-1906 and DERS-1910) compared to traditional formulations on the market. Taking into account the maximum doses applied, the reduction in the amount of Active Ingredient per hectare ranged from 48% to 68%, achieving similar, equal or greater control of the three types of formulations (DERS-1904, DERS-1906 and DERS-1910) compared to traditional formulations on the market. All formulations used achieved control above 80% at 21 days after application. Example 6 The following tests show how the different microemulsion formulations of the invention control the target weeds, reducing the amount of active ingredient applied per hectare, and how they behave in tank mixtures. Active ingredient: DPAG Amine Ethoxylate, Coconut Fat, Ethanol, Water Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 35 / 264 27 / 73 CERS1807 20% 40% 9% 8% 25% CERS1809 27% 45% 11% 9% 20% CERS1811 13% 36% 8% 7% 30% Materials and methods: The test was conducted in the field in the city of Sánchez Bs As (33°26'1,76S; 60°10'10,01W). In a Vertic Argiudoll, fine, illitic, thermal soil (USDA Soil Taxonomy V. 2006) with utilization capacity: II w. The experimental design used was a completely randomized block design (CRBD). Each treated plot was 2 m wide by 10 m long with paired controls and a buffer zone of 1 m wide by 10 m long. Each treatment was replicated 4 times. Three different Dicamba microemulsion compositions (CERS-1807, CERS-1809, and CERS-1811) were evaluated. They were compared with two standard Dicamba formulations (dicamba dimethylamine salt 57.8% SL and dicamba diglycolamine salt 70.8% SL) and a blank control without application. Each formulated product was evaluated with two label doses and two application volumes (40 l / ha and 80 l / ha). A dose of 2 l / ha of glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL was added to all treatments. Treatment Product Dose (l / ha) Volume (l / ha) 1 Control blank 0 80 2 CERS-1807 0.2 80 3 CERS-1807 0.4 80 4 CERS-1809 0.15 80 Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 36 / 264 28 / 73 5 CERS-1809 0.30 80 6 CERS-1811 0.3 80 7 CERS-1811 0.6 80 8 dicamba dimethylamine salt 57.8% SL 0.2 80 9 dicamba dimethylamine salt 57.8% SL 0.4 80 10 dicamba diglycolamine salt 70.8% SL 0.3 80 11 diglycolamine dicamba salt 70.8% SL 0.5 80 12 Blank control * 0 40 13 CERS-1807 * 0.2 40 14 CERS-1807 * 0.4 40 15 CERS-1809 * 0.15 40 16 CERS-1809 * 0.30 40 17 CERS-1811 * 0.3 40 18 CERS-1811 * 0.6 40 19 dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL * 0.2 40 20 dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL * 0.4 40 21 dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL * 0.3 40 22 dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL * 0.5 40 *These treatments were not applied because the products dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL and diglycolamine dicamba salt 70.8% SL showed tank incompatibility when mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL at a volume of 40 L / ha. The herbicides were sprayed for complete coverage on corn straw. For this purpose, a van with an adapted CO2 spray backpack and four flat fan tablets was provided. One flat fan tablet (TT110015) was used at 2 bar pressure and a peak spacing of 0.52 m. The speed Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 37 / 264 29 / 73 average was 6.9 km / ha, the droplet size achieved was average (175-250 microns). The application was submitted on November 20, 2019. The phenological stage of Conyza bonariensis, "black branch," at the time of application was vegetative, with a height of 7 to 10 cm. The weather conditions were: T (°C) 28.2 RH (%) 56 *Δ T (°C) 6 Speed ​​(km / h) 5.5 The methodology used to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments in controlling the current weed was that proposed by ALAM at 7, 14, and 21 DAA. Result: DDA Treatment Mean ± SE LSD Fisher p-value 7 1 0 ± 2.30 a <0.0001 2 27.5 ± 2.30 b 3 42.5 ± 2.30 cd 4 26.25 ± 2.30 b 5 42.5 ± 2.30 cd 6 28.75 ± 2.30 b 7 42.5 ± 2.30 cd 8 36.25 ± 2.30 bcd 9 45 ± 2.30 d 10 32.5 ± 2.30 bc 11 46.25 ± 2.30 d 14 1 0 ± 3.86 a <0.0001 2 53.75 ± 3.86 bc 3 67.375 ± 3.86 c 4 47.25 ± 3.86 b 5 72.5 ± 3.86 c 6 53.875 ± 3.86 bc 7 69.25 ± 3.86 c 8 46. 125 ± 3.86 b Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 38 / 264 30 / 73 9 63. 25 ± 3.86 bc 10 57.125 ± 3.86 bc 11 67.875 ± 3.86 c 21 1 0 ± 2.29 to <0.0001 2 88 ± 2.29 bcd 3 98.5 ± 2.29 d 4 88 ± 2.29 bcd 5 94.125 ± 2.29 bcd 6 87.05 ± 2.29 bcd 7 93 ± 2.29 bcd 8 84.5 ± 2.29 b 9 97.25 ± 2.29 cd 10 89.5 ± 2.29 bcd 11 98 ± 2.29 cd Conclusions: During the three days of evaluation, there were significant differences between the absolute control (TA) and the treatments applied. During the three days of evaluation, significant differences were observed between the treatments applied, both in different doses of the same product and between different formulated products. Considering the minimum doses applied, the reduction in the amount of Active Ingredient per hectare ranged from 58% to 72%, achieving similar, equal, or greater control of the three types of formulations (CERS-1807, CERS-1809, and CERS-1811) compared to traditional formulations on the market. Taking into account the maximum doses applied, the reduction in the amount of Active Ingredient per hectare ranged from 56% to 66%, achieving similar, equal or greater control of the three types of formulations (CERS-1807, CERS-1809 and CERS-1811) compared to traditional formulations on the market. All formulations used achieved control above 80% at 21 days after application. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 39 / 264 31 / 73 Example 7 The following tests show how the different microemulsion formulations of the invention control the target weeds, reducing the amount of active ingredient applied per hectare, and how they behave in tank mixtures. Active ingredient DPAG Amine Ethoxylate Coconut Fat Ethanol Water FORS-1703 12.5% ​​40% 10% 7% 30% FORS-1707 25% 45% 12% 9% 20% FORS-1709 16% 42% 11% 8% 26% Materials and methods: The test was conducted in the field in the city of Sánchez Bs As (33°26'1,76S; 60°10'10,01W). In a Vertic Argiudoll, fine, illitic, thermal soil (USDA Soil Taxonomy V. 2006) with utilization capacity: II w. The experimental design used was a completely randomized block design (CRBD). Each treated plot was 2 m wide by 10 m long with paired controls and a buffer zone of 1 m wide by 10 m long. Each treatment was replicated 4 times. Three different fomesafen microemulsion compositions (FORS-1703, FORS-1707, and FORS-1709) were evaluated. They were compared with a standard fomesafen formulation (fomesafen sodium salt 26.2% SL) and a blank control without application. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 40 / 264 32 / 73 Each formulated product was evaluated at the label dose and two application volumes (40 l / ha and 80 l / ha). A dose of 2 l / ha of glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL was added to all treatments. Treatment Product Dose (l / ha) Volume (l / ha) 1 Blank control 0 80 2 FORS-1703 1.3 80 3 FORS-1707 0.65 80 4 FORS-1709 1.0 80 5 Fomesafefen sodium salt 26.2% SL 1.3 80 Treatment Product Dose (l / ha) Volume (l / ha) 6 Control blank * 0 40 7 FORS-1703 * 1.3 40 8 FORS-1707 * 0.65 40 9 FORS-1709 * 1.0 40 10 Sodium salt fomesafen 26.2% SL * 1.3 40 *These treatments were not applied because the fomesafen 26.2% SL sodium salt product showed tank incompatibility when mixed with glyphosate 66.2% SL potassium salt at a volume of 40 l / ha. Herbicides were sprayed for full coverage on the soybean crop. For this purpose, a van with a CO2 spray backpack and four flat fan tablets was provided. One flat fan tablet (TT110015) was used at 2 bar pressure and a peak spacing of 0.52 m. The average speed was 6.9 km / ha, and the droplet size achieved was medium (175-250 microns). Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 41 / 264 33 / 73 The application was submitted on December 6, 2019. The phenological stage of Conyza bonariensis, "black branch," at the time of application was vegetative, with a height of 10 to 15 cm. The weather conditions were: T (°C) 31.3 RH (%) 62 *Δ T (°C) 6 Speed ​​(km / h) 4.2 The methodology used to evaluate the effectiveness of weed control and phytotoxicity in the crop generated by the treatments was that proposed by ALAM at 7, 14, and 21 DAA. Result: Control effectiveness: DAA Treatment Mean ± SE LSD Fisher value 7 1 0 ± 2.06 a <0.000 1 <0.000 1 2 42.5 ± 2.06 b 3 41.25 ± 2.06 b 4 44.5 ± 2.06 b 5 40. 25 ± 2.06 b 14 1 0 ± 3.54 a 2 57.25 ± 3.54 bc 3 61.25 ± 3.54 bc 4 72 ± 3.54 c 5 47.12 ± 3.54 b 21 1 0 ± 1.89 a <0.000 1 2 90 ± 1.89 b 3 90 ± 1.89 b 4 94.85 ± 1.89 b 5 88.75 ± 1.89 b Control effectiveness: Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 42 / 264 34 / 73 None of the treatments resulted in phytotoxicity in the crop. Conclusions: During the three days of evaluation, there were significant differences between the absolute control (TA) and the treatments applied. Considering the doses applied per hectare, the reduction in the amount of Active Ingredient was 50%, achieving equal or greater control of the three types of formulations (FORS-1703, FORS-1707 and FORS-1709) compared to the traditional formulation on the market. All formulations used achieved control above 90% at 21 days after application. Example 8 The following tests show how the different microemulsion formulations of the invention control the target weeds, reducing the amount of active ingredient applied per hectare, and how they behave in tank mixtures. Active ingredient DPAG Amine Ethoxylate Coconut Fat Ethanol Water LARS-2102 12% 39% 9% 7% 30% LARS-2105 24% 45% 12% 9% 20% LARS2109 18% 42% 10% 8% 22% Materials and methods: Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 43 / 264 35 / 73 The test was conducted in the field in the city of Sánchez Bs As (33°26'1,76S; 60°10'10,01W). In a Vertic Argiudoll, fine, illitic, thermal soil (USDA Soil Taxonomy V. 2006) with utilization capacity: II w. The experimental design used was a completely randomized block design (CRBD). Each treated plot was 2 m wide by 10 m long with paired controls and a buffer zone of 1 m wide by 10 m long. Each treatment was replicated 4 times. Three different lactofen microemulsion compositions (LARS-2102, LARS-2105, and LARS-2109) were evaluated. They were compared with a standard lactofen formulation (lactofen 24%). EC) and a blank control with no application. Each formulated product was evaluated at the label dose and two application volumes (40 l / ha and 80 l / ha). A dose of 2 l / ha of glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL was added to all treatments. Treatment Product Dose (l / ha) Volume (l / ha) 1 Blank control 0 80 2 LARS-2102 1.00 80 3 LARS-2105 0.50 80 4 LARS-2109 0.75 80 5 Lactofen 24% EC 1.00 80 6 Blank control * 0 40 7 LARS-2102 * 1 40 8 LARS-2105 * 1 40 9 LARS-2109 * 1 40 10 Lactofen 24% EC * 1 40 Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 44 / 264 36 / 73 * These treatments were not applied because the lactofen 24% EC product showed tank incompatibility when mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL at a volume of 40 l / ha. Herbicides were sprayed for full coverage in the soybean crop. For this purpose, a van with a CO2 spray backpack and four flat fan tablets was provided. One flat fan tablet (TT110015) was used at 2 bar pressure and a peak spacing of 0.52 m. The average speed was 6.9 km / ha, and the droplet size achieved was Medium (175 - 250 microns). The application was submitted on December 6, 2019. The phenological stage of Conyza bonariensis, "black branch," at the time of application was vegetative, with a height of 10 to 15 cm. The weather conditions were: T (°C) 31.3 RH (%) 62 *Δ T (°C) 6 Speed ​​(km / h) 4.2 The methodology used to evaluate the effectiveness of weed control and phytotoxicity in the crop generated by the treatments was that proposed by ALAM at 7, 14 and 21 DAA. Result: Control efficiency: Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 45 / 264 37 / 73 DAA Treatment Mean ± SE LSD Fisher p-value 7 1 0 ± 2.06 a <0.0001 2 39.5 ± 2.06 b 3 38.25 ± 2.06 b 4 41.5 ± 2.06 b 5 37.25 ± 2.06 b 14 1 0 ± 2.45 a <0.0001 2 59.25 ± 2.45 b 3 63.25 ± 2.45 b 4 68 ± 2.45 b 5 60.75 ± 2.45 b 21 1 0 ± 1.79 a <0.0001 2 91 ± 1.79 b 3 91 ± 1.79 b 4 95.75 ± 1.79 b 5 90.75 ± 1.79 b Phytotoxicity: None of the treatments resulted in phytotoxicity in the crop. Conclusions: During the three days of evaluation, significant differences were observed between the absolute control (TA) and the treatments applied. Considering the doses applied per hectare, the reduction in the amount of Active Ingredient was 50%, achieving equal or greater control of the three types of formulations (LARS-2102, LARS-2105 and LARS-2109) compared to the traditional formulation on the market. All formulations used achieved control above 90% at 21 days after application. To demonstrate the high compatibility with other agrochemicals in ultra-low volume (ULV) applications, the following laboratory studies were conducted using the Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 46 / 264 38 / 73 formulations that are the subject of the invention, comparing them with conventional commercial products commonly used in the market. The results obtained show that the formulations achieve full compatibility even at very low dilutions, which is beneficial. Example 9 Objective: To evaluate the stability of the application solution with different types of 2,4-D formulations in conventional field mixtures, using different application volumes. Materials and methods: The test was conducted at the Chimagro SA laboratory in the city of Florencio Varela, Buenos Aires Province. It is registered in the SENASA laboratory network under number 00043. Three different 2,4-D microemulsion compositions (DERS-1904, DERS-1906, and DERS-1910) were evaluated. They were compared with three standard 2,4-D formulations, namely 2,4-D choline salt 66.9% SL, 2,4-D ethylhexyl ester 97% EC, and 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL. They were tested as the single product in solution and in combination with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL, acid equivalent 54% w / v. In turn, the different mixtures were tested at different application volumes (80, 40, 20 and 10 l / ha), with the aim of simulating optimal application conditions for different situations. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 47 / 264 39 / 73 ultra-low water volume, which corresponds to land and air applications. The doses chosen for the trial were selected considering the maximum doses indicated on the label. The amount of product needed to simulate the different application solutions is shown in column 5 of the table below: Test, Product Doses (l / ha) Volume (l / ha) Volume in test tube (cm3 / 100ml) 1 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL 1.4 80 1.75 2 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.4+ 2 80 1.75 + 2.5 3 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL 1.4 40 3.5 4 2.4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.4+ 2 40 3.5 + 5.0 5 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL 1.4 20 7 6 2,4-D salt dimethylamine 60% SL + potassium salt of glyphosate 66.2% SL 1.4+ 2 20 7 + 10.0 7 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL 1.4 10 14 8 2.4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL + potassium salt of glyphosate 66.2% SL 1.4+ 2 10 14+ 20.0 9 2.4-d Choline Salt 66.9% SL 2.5 80 3.13 10 2.4-d choline salt 66.9% SL + 2.5+ 2 80 3.13 + 2.5 potassium salt Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 48 / 264 40 / 73 glyphosate 66.2% SL 11 2.4-d Choline Salt 66.9% SL 2.5 40 6.25 12 2.4-d choline salt 66.9% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 2.5+ 2 40 6.25 + 5.0 13 2.4-d Choline Salt 66.9% SL 2.5 20 12.5 14 2.4-d choline salt 66.9% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 2.5+ 2 20 12.5 + 10.0 15 2.4-d Choline Salt 66.9% SL 2.5 10 25 16 2.4-d choline salt 66.9% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 2.5+ 2 10 25 + 20.0 17 2.4-D 2-ethylhexyl ester 97% EC 1.4 80 1.75 18 2.4-D ethylhexyl 2-ester 97% EC + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.4 + 2 80 1.75 + 2.5 19 2.4-D 2-ethylhexyl ester 97% EC 1.4 40 3.5 20 2.4-D 2-ethylhexyl ester 97% EC + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.4 + 2 40 3.5 + 5.0 21 2,4-D Ethylhexyl 2-ester 97% EC 1.4 20 7 22 2.4-D ethylhexyl 2-ester 97% EC + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.4 + 2 20 7 + 10.0 23 2.4-D ethylhexyl 2-ester 97% EC 1.4 10 14 24 2,4-D ethylhexyl 2-ester 97% EC + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1,4 + 2 10 14 + 20.0 25 DERS-1904 1.2 80 1.5 26 DERS-1904 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.2 + 2 80 1.5 + 2.5 27 DERS-1904 1.2 40 3 28 DERS-1904 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.2 + 2 40 3 + 5.0 29 DERS-1904 1.2 20 6. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 49 / 264 41 / 73 30 DERS-1904 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.2 + 2 20 6 + 10.0 31 DERS-1904 1.2 10 12 32 DERS-1904 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.2 + 2 10 12 + 20.0 33 DERS-1906 1.8 80 1.5 34 DERS-1906 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.8 + 2 80 1.5 + 2.5 35 DERS-1906 1.8 40 3 36 DERS-1906 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.8 + 2 40 3 + 5.0 37 DERS-1906 1.8 20 6 38 DERS-1906 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.8 + 2 20 6 + 10.0 39 DERS-1906 1.8 10 12 40 DERS-1906 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.8 + 2 10 12 + 20.0 41 DERS-1910 0.9 80 1.5 42 DERS-1910 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.9 + 2 80 1.5 + 2.5 43 DERS-1910 0.9 40 3 44 DERS-1910 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.9 + 2 40 3 + 5.0 45 DERS-1910 0.9 20 6 46 DERS-1910 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.9 + 2 20 6 + 10.0 47 DERS-1910 0.9 10 12 48 DERS-1910 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.9 + 2 10 12 + 20.0 Columns from the previous table: Test identification number, product tested, dose used in the field, volume of water applied in the field, quantity of formulated product applied in the 100 ml test tube. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 50 / 264 42 / 73 For the compatibility tests, 100 ml glass test tubes with airtight caps from the IVA brand were used, with a precision of + 0.5 ml. To prepare the mixture, 50 ml of water were added first, then the amount required for each application volume of 2,4-D, and then the glyphosate for the treatments, as appropriate. Finally, water was added to reach the final volume. Once the solution was finished, the container was closed and inverted 10 times, rotating it 180°. After 10 inversions, the test tube is left to stand and observed for any precipitate or supernatant at 30 seconds, 30 minutes, and 2 hours. In the case of solutions in which a precipitate, meniscus, or foam formed, its height was measured. Results obtained: Treatment Product Dose (l / ha) Volume (l / ha) Observations (30 sec) Observations (30 min) Observations (2 hours) 1 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL 1.4 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 2 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.4 + 2 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 3 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL 1.4 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 51 / 264 43 / 73 4 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1,4 + 2 40 Solution starting to precipitate Solution with solid particles Solution with solid particles and 8 ml of precipitate 5 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL 1,4 20 Slightly opalescent solution Opalescent solution 6 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1,4 + 2 20 Appearance of the solution Clear with solid at the bottom. Clear solution with solid at the bottom. 22 precipitate ml of precipitate ml of precipitate 7 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL 1.4 10 Slightly opalescent solution Opalescent solution Opalescent solution with increased caramel color 8 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.4 + 2 10 Product Appearance Product completely fallen. 78 fallen.68 precipitate ml of precipitate ml of precipitate 9 2,4-d Choline Salt 66.9% SL 2.5 80 Emulsion Emulsion Emulsion opalescent opalescent opalescent 10 2,4-d choline salt 66.9% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 2.5 + 2 80 Emulsion Emulsion Emulsion opalescent opalescent opalescent slightly slightly slightly ochre ochre ochre 11 2,4-d Choline Salt 66.9% SL 2.5 40 Emulsion opalescent Emulsion opalescent Emulsion opalescent 12 2,4-d choline salt 66.9% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 2.5 + 2 40 Emulsion opalescent Opalescent emulsion Slightly colored and colored precipitate on the walls 13 2,4-d Choline Salt 66.9% SL 2.5 20 Opalescent emulsion White emulsion 14 2,4-d choline salt 66.9% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 2.5 + 2 20 Weak opalescent emulsion Emulsion with 23 ml of slightly colored precipitate Emulsion with 20 ml of slightly colored precipitate. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 52 / 264 44 / 73 15 2,4-d Choline Salt 66.9% SL 2.5 10 White Emulsion White Emulsion White Emulsion 16 2,4-d Choline Salt 66.9% SL + Glyphosate Potassium Salt 66.2% SL 2.5 + 2 10 Weak ochre emulsion, Fully ochre emulsion Fully ochre emulsion Beginning of precipitate drop with 65 ml of drop with 61 ml of precipitate precipitate 17 2,4-D Ethylhexyl 2-ester 97% EC 1.4 80 Opalescent Emulsion Opalescent Emulsion Opalescent Emulsion 18 2,4-D Ethylhexyl 2-ester 97% EC + Glyphosate Potassium Salt 66.2% SL 1.4 + 2 80 Opalescent Emulsion Opalescent Emulsion 19 2,4-D ethylhexyl 2-ester 97% EC 1,4 40 Opalescent Emulsion 20 2,4-D ethylhexyl 2-ester 97% EC + potassium glyphosate salt 66.2% SL 1,4 + 2 40 Opalescent Emulsion Slightly colored and colored precipitate on the walls 21 2,4-D ethylhexyl 2-ester 97% EC 1,4 20 Opalescent emulsion Opalescent emulsion Opalescent emulsion 22 2,4-D ethylhexyl 2-ester 97% EC + potassium glyphosate salt 66.2% SL 1,4 + 2 20 Weak opalescent emulsion Emulsion with 4 ml of Emulsion with 8 ml of slightly colored precipitate precipitate 23 2,4-D ethylhexyl 2-ester 97% EC 1,4 10 Opalescent emulsion Opalescent emulsion Opalescent emulsion 24 2,4-D ethylhexyl 2-ester 97% EC + potassium glyphosate salt 66.2% SL 1,4 + 2 10 Opalescent emulsion Emulsion with Emulsion with weak, beginning of precipitate 12 ml of precipitate 20 ml of precipitate 25 DERS-1904 1.2 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution, Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 53 / 264 45 / 73 26 DERS-1904 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.2 + 2 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 27 DERS-1904 1.2 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 28 DERS-1904 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.2 + 2 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 29 DERS-1904 1.2 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 30 DERS-1904 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.2 + 2 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 31 DERS-1904 1.2 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 32 DERS-1904 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.2 + 2 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 33 DERS-1906 1.8 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 34 DERS-1906 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.8 + 2 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 35 DERS-1906 1,8 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 36 DERS-1906 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.8 + 2 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 37 DERS-1906 1.8 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution, Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 54 / 264 46 / 73 38 DERS-1906 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.8 + 2 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 39 DERS-1906 1.8 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 40 DERS-1906 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.8 + 2 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 41 DERS-1910 0.9 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 42 DERS-1910 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.9 + 2 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 43 DERS-1910 0.9 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 44 DERS-1910 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.9 + 2 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 45 DERS-1910 0.9 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 46 DERS-1910 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.9 + 2 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 47 DERS-1910 0,9 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 48 DERS-1910 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.9 + 2 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution, Columns from the previous table: Test identification number, product tested, field dose used, volume of water applied in the field, observations at 30 sec, 30 min and 2 hours. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 55 / 264 47 / 73 Conclusions: In all cases, the products DERS-1904, DERS-1906, and DERS1910 maintained adequate tank compatibility for field application at all application volumes when mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL. Similarly, 2,4-D ethylhexyl ester 97% EC also maintained adequate tank compatibility at all application volumes. For the products 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL and 2,4-D choline salt 66.9% SL, the volume of 80 l / ha maintained adequate tank compatibility for field application. For volumes of 40, 20, and 10 l / ha, there was no adequate compatibility with the tanks, so field application is not feasible at these volumes. All products showed adequate compatibility in all water volumes when not mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL. Example 10 Objective: To evaluate the stability of the application solution with different types of dicamba formulations in conventional field mixtures, using different application volumes. Materials and methods: Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 56 / 264 48 / 73 The test was conducted at the Chimagro SA laboratory in the city of Florencio Varela, Buenos Aires Province. It is registered in the SENASA laboratory network under number 00043. Three different Dicamba microemulsion compositions (CERS-1807, CERS-1809, and CERS-1811) were evaluated. They were compared with two standard Dicamba formulations (dicamba dimethylamine salt 57.8% SL and dicamba diglycolamine salt 70.8% SL). They were tested as a single product in solution and in combination with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL (54% w / v acid equivalent). In turn, the different mixtures were tested at different application volumes (80, 40, 20 and 10 l / ha), with the aim of simulating optimal application conditions for ultra-low water volume situations, which correspond to ground and aerial applications. The doses chosen for the trial were determined according to the maximum doses indicated on the label. The amount of product needed to simulate the different application solutions is shown in column 5 of the following table: Trial Product Dose (l / ha) Volume (l / ha) Volume in test tube (cm3 / 100ml) 1 Dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL 0.4 80 0.5 2 Dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.4 + 2 80 0.5 + 2.5 3 Dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL 0.4 40 1.0 4 Dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL + 0.4 + 2 40 1.0 + 5.0 Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 57 / 264 49 / 73 Glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 5 Dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL 0.4 20 2.0 6 Dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL + Glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.4 + 2 20 2.0 + 10.0 7 Dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL 0.4 10 4.0 8 Dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL + Glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.4 + 2 10 4.0 + 20.0 9 Diglycolamine dicamba salt 70.8% SL 0.5 80 0.625 10 Diglycolamine dicamba salt 70.8% SL + Glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.5 + 2 80 0.625 + 2.5 11 Dicamba diglycollamin salt 70.8% SL 0.5 40 1.25 12 Dicamba diglycollamin salt 70.8% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.5 + 2 40 1.25 + 5.0 13 Dicamba diglycollamin salt 70.8% SL 0.5 20 2.5 14 Dicamba diglycollamin salt 70.8% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.5 + 2 20 2.5 + 10.0 15 Dicamba diglycollamin salt 70.8% SL 0.5 10 5.0 16 Dicamba salt diglycollamin 70.8% SL + potassium salt of glyphosate 66.2% SL 0.5 + 2 10 5.0 + 20.0 17 CERS-1807 0.4 80 0.5 18 CERS-1807 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.4 + 2 80 0.5 + 2.5 19 CERS-1807 0.4 40 1.0 20 CERS-1807 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.4 + 2 40 1.0 + 5.0 21 CERS-1807 0.4 20 2.0 22 CERS-1807 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.4 + 2 20 2.0 + 10.0 23 CERS-1807 0.4 10 4.0 24 CERS-1807 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.4 + 2 10 4.0 + 20.0 25 CERS-1809 0.3 80 0.5 26 CERS-1809 + glyphosate potassium salt 0.3 + 2 80 0.5 + 2.5 Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 58 / 264 50 / 73 66.2% SL 27 CERS-1809 0.3 40 1.0 28 CERS-1809 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.3 + 2 40 1.0 + 5.0 29 CERS-1809 0.3 20 2.0 30 CERS-1809 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.3 + 2 20 2.0 + 10.0 31 CERS-1809 0.3 10 4.0 32 CERS-1809 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.3 + 2 10 4.0 + 20.0 33 CERS-1811 0.6 80 0.5 34 CERS- 1811 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.6 + 2 80 0.5 + 2.5 35 CERS-1811 0.6 40 1.0 36 CERS-1811 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.6 + 2 40 1.0 + 5.0 37 CERS-1811 0.6 20 2.0 38 CERS-1811 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.6 + 2 20 2.0 + 10.0 39 CERS-1811 0.6 10 4.0 40 CERS-1811 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.6 + 2 10 4.0 + 20.0 Table columns: Test identification number, product tested, dose used in the field, volume of water applied in the field, quantity of formulated product applied in the 100 ml test tube. For the compatibility tests, 100 ml glass test tubes with airtight caps from the IVA brand, with a precision of + 0.5 ml, were used. To prepare the mixture, 50 ml of water were added first, then the amount required for each application volume of dicamba and... Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 59 / 264 51 / 73 then glyphosate for treatments as needed and, finally, water was added to reach the final volume. Once the solution was finished, the container was closed and inverted 10 times, rotating it 180°. Treatment Product Dose (l / ha) Volume (l / ha) Observations (30 sec) Observations (30 min) Observations (2 hours) 1 Dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL 0.4 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 2 Dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.4 + 2 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 3 Dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL 0.4 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 4 Dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.4 + 2 40 Crystalline solution Solution beginning to precipitate Solution with solid particles and 2 ml of precipitate 5 Dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL 0.4 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 6 dicamba salt dimethylamine 57.8% SL + potassium glyphosate salt 66.2% SL 0.4 + 2 20 Solution beginning to precipitate Solution with solid particles and 2 ml of precipitate Solution with solid particles and 2 ml of precipitate 7 dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL 0.4 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution, Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 60 / 264 52 / 73 8 Dicamba salt dimethylamine 57.8% SL + potassium glyphosate salt 66.2% SL 0.4 + 2 10 Solution beginning to precipitate Solution with solid particles and 4 ml of precipitate Solution with solid particles and 4 ml of precipitate 9 Dicamba diglycolamine salt 70.8% SL 0.5 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 10 Dicamba salt diglycolamine 70.8% SL + potassium glyphosate salt 66.2% SL 0.5 + 2 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 11 Dicamba diglycolamine salt 70.8% SL 0.5 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 12 Dicamba salt diglycolamine 70.8% SL + potassium glyphosate salt 66.2% SL 0.5 + 2 40 Crystalline solution Solution beginning to precipitate Solution with solid particles and 2 ml of precipitate 13 dicamba diglycolamine salt 70.8% SL 0.5 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 14 dicamba diglycolamine salt 70.8% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.5 + 2 20 Solution beginning to precipitate Solution with solid particles and 1 ml of precipitate Solution with solid particles and 1 ml of precipitate 15 Dicamba diglycolamine salt 70.8% SL 0.5 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 16 Dicamba diglycolamine salt 70.8% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.5 + 2 10 Solution beginning to precipitate Solution with solid particles and 1 ml of precipitate Solution with solid particles and 1 ml of precipitate, Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 61 / 264 53 / 73 17 CERS-1807 0.4 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 18 CERS-1807 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.4 + 2 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 19 CERS-1807 0.4 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 20 CERS-1807 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.4 + 2 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 21 CERS-1807 0.4 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 22 CERS-1807 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.4 + 2 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 23 CERS-1807 0.4 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 24 CERS - 1807 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.4 + 2 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 25 CERS-1809 0.3 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 26 CERS - 1809 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.3 + 2 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 27 CERS-1809 0.3 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 28 CERS - 1809 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.3 + 2 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 62 / 264 54 / 73 29 CERS-1809 0.3 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 30 CERS-1809 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.3 + 2 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 31 CERS-1809 0.3 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 32 CERS-1809 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.3 + 2 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 33 CERS-1811 0.6 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 34 CERS-1811 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.6 + 2 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 35 CERS-1811 0.6 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 36 CERS - 1811 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.6 + 2 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 37 CERS-1811 0.6 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 38 CERS - 1811 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.6 + 2 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 39 CERS-1811 0.6 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 40 CERS - 1811 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.6 + 2 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 63 / 264 55 / 73 After 10 inversions, the test tube is left to stand and observed for any precipitate or supernatant at 30 seconds, 30 minutes, and 2 hours. In the case of solutions in which a precipitate, meniscus, or foam formed, its height was measured. Result: Columns from the previous table: Test identification number, product tested, field dose used, volume of water applied in the field, observations at 30 sec, 30 min and 2 hours. Conclusions: In all cases, the products CERS-1807, CERS-1809, and CERS1811 maintained adequate tank compatibility for field application at all application volumes when mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL. For the products dimethylamine dicamba salt 57.8% SL and diglycolamine dicamba salt 70.8% SL, the volume of 80 l / ha maintained adequate tank compatibility for field application. For volumes of 40, 20, and 10 l / ha, there was no adequate compatibility with the tanks; therefore, field application is not feasible at these volumes. All products showed adequate compatibility in all water volumes when not mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL. Example 11 Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 64 / 264 56 / 73 Objective: To evaluate the stability of the application solution with different types of fomesafen formulations in conventional field mixtures, using different application volumes. Materials and methods: The test was conducted at the Chimagro SA laboratory in the city of Florencio Varela, Buenos Aires Province. It is registered in the SENASA laboratory network under number 00043. Three different fomesafen microemulsion compositions (FORS-1703, FORS-1707, and FORS-1709) were evaluated. They were compared with a standard formulation of fomesafen sodium salt 26.2% SL (acid equivalent 25% w / v). They were tested as a single product in solution and in combination with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL (acid equivalent 54% w / v). In turn, the different mixtures were tested at different application volumes (80, 40, 20 and 10 l / ha), with the aim of simulating optimal application conditions for ultra-low water volume situations, which correspond to ground and aerial applications. The doses chosen for the trial were selected based on the doses indicated on the label. The amount of product needed to simulate the different application solutions is shown in column 5 of the following table: Assay Product Dose (l / ha) Volume (l / ha) Volume in test tube Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 65 / 264 57 / 73 (cm3 / 100ml) 1 Sodium Fomesafefen Salt 26.2% SL 1.3 80 1.63 2 Sodium Fomesafefen Salt 26.2% SL + Potassium Glyphosate Salt 66.2% SL 1.3 + 2 80 1.63 + 2.5 3 Sodium Fomesafefen Salt 26.2% SL 1.3 40 3.25 4 Sodium Fomesafefen Salt 26.2% SL + Potassium Glyphosate Salt 66.2% SL 1.3 + 2 40 3.25 + 5.0 5 Sodium Fomesafefen Salt 26.2% SL 1.3 20 6.5 6 Sodium Fomesafefen Salt 26.2% SL + Potassium Glyphosate Salt 66.2% SL 1.3 + 2 20 6.5 + 10.0 7 Sodium Fomesafefen Salt 26.2% SL 1.3 10 13.0 8 Sodium Fomesafefen Salt 26.2% SL + Potassium Glyphosate Salt 66.2% SL 1.3 + 2 10 13.0 + 20.0 9 FORS-1703 1.3 80 1.63 10 FORS-1703 + Potassium Glyphosate Salt 66.2% SL 1.3 + 2 80 1.63 + 2.5 11 FORS-1703 1.3 40 3.25 12 FORS-1703 + Potassium Glyphosate Salt 66.2% SL 1.3 + 2 40 3.25 + 5.0 13 FORS-1703 1.3 20 6.5 14 FORS - 1703 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.3 + 2 20 6.5 + 10.0 15 FORS-1703 1.3 10 13.0 16 FORS - 1703 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.3 + 2 10 13.0 + 20,0 17 FORS-1707 0.65 80 1.63 18 FORS - 1707 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.65 + 2 80 1.63 + 2.5 19 FORS-1707 0.65 40 3.25 FORS - 0.77 + salt of potassium glyphosate 66.2% SL 0.65 + 2 40 3.25 + 5.0 21 FORS-1707 0.65 20 6.5 22 FORS - 1707 + potassium salt of glyphosate 66.2% SL 0.65 + 20.20 + 20.06 FORS-1707 0.65 10 13.0 24 FORS - 1707 + potassium salt of glyphosate 66.2% SL 0.65 + 2 10 13.0 + 20.0 25 FORS-1709 1.0 80 1.60 25 FORS-1709 + potassium salt 1793 glyphosate 66.2% SL 1.0 + 2 80 1.63 + 2.5 27 FORS-1709 1.0 40 3.25, Petition 870220091701, of 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 66 / 264 58 / 73 28 FORS-1709 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.0 + 2 40 3.25 + 5.0 29 FORS-1709 1.0 20 6.5 30 FORS-1709 + glyphosate potassium salt 6.20% SL 6.20 + 6.5 + 10.0 31 FORS-1709 1.0 10 13.0 32 FORS-1709 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.0 + 2 10 13.0 + 20.0 Columns from the previous table: Test identification number, product tested, dose used in the field, volume of water applied in the field, quantity of formulated product applied in the 100 ml test tube. For the compatibility tests, 100 ml glass test tubes with airtight caps from the IVA brand were used, with a precision of ± 0.5 ml. To prepare the mixture, 50 ml of water were first added, followed by the amount of fomesafen required for each application volume, then glyphosate for the treatments as needed, and finally water was added to reach the final volume. Once the solution was ready, the container was closed and inverted 10 times, rotating it 180°. After 10 inversions, the test tube is left to stand and observed for any precipitate or supernatant at 30 seconds, 30 minutes, and 2 hours. In the case of solutions in which a precipitate, meniscus, or foam formed, its height was measured. The results are presented in the table below: Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 67 / 264 59 / 73 Treatments Product Dose (l / ha) Volume (l / ha) Observations (30 sec) Observations (30 min) Observations (2 hours) 1 Sodium salt fomesafen 26.2% SL 1.3 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 2 Sodium salt fomesafen 26.2% SL + potassium salt glyphosate 66.2% SL 1.3 + 2 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 3 Sodium salt fomesafen 26.2% SL 1.3 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 4 Sodium salt fomesafen 26.2% SL + potassium salt glyphosate 66.2% SL 1.3 + 2 40 Yellow solution with 8 ml of solid at the bottom Yellow solution with 5 ml of solid at the bottom Yellow solution with 5 ml of solid at the bottom 5 Sodium salt fomesafen 26.2% SL 1.3 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 6 fomesafen sodium salt 26.2% SL + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1,3 + 2 20 Yellow solution with 8 ml of solid at the bottom Yellow solution with 5 ml of solid at the bottom Yellow solution with 5 ml of solid at the bottom 7 Sodium fomesafen salt 26.2% SL 1.3 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 8 Sodium fomesafen salt 26.2% SL + Potassium glyphosate salt 66.2% SL 1.3 + 2 10 Yellow solution with 8 ml of solid at the bottom Yellow solution with 5 ml of solid at the bottom Yellow solution with 5 ml of solid at the bottom, Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 68 / 264 60 / 73 9 FORS-1703 1.3 80 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 10 FORS 1703 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.3 + 2 80 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 11 FORS-1703 1.3 40 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 12 FORS 1703 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.3 + 2 40 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 13 FORS-1703 1.3 20 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 14 FORS 1703 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.3 + 2 20 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 15 FORS-1703 1.3 10 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 16 FORS 1703 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.3 + 2 10 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 17 FORS-1707 0,65 80 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 18 FORS 1707 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.65 + 2 80 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 69 / 264 61 / 73 19 FORS-1707 0.65 40 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 20 FORS 1707 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.65+ 2 40 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 21 FORS-1707 0.65 20 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 22 FORS 1707 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.65+ 2 20 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 23 FORS-1707 0.65 10 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 24 FORS 1707 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.65+ 2 10 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 25 FORS-1709 1.0 80 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 26 FORS-1709 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1,0 + 2 80 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 27 FORS-1709 1.0 40 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 28 FORS-1709 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.0 + 2 40 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 29 FORS-1709 1.0 20 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 70 / 264 62 / 73 30 FORS-1709 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.0 + 2 20 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 31 FORS-1709 1.0 10 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution 32 FORS-1709 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1.0 + 2 10 Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Yellow crystalline solution Columns from the previous table: Test identification number, product tested, field dose used, volume of water applied in the field, observations at 30 sec, 30 min and 2 hours. Conclusions: In all cases, the products FORS-1703, FORS-1707 and FORS1709 maintained adequate tank compatibility for field application at all application volumes when mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL. For the fomesafen sodium salt 26.2% SL product at a volume of 80 l / ha, adequate tank compatibility was maintained for field application. For volumes of 40, 20, and 10 l / ha, there was no adequate compatibility with the tanks; therefore, field application is not feasible at these volumes. All products showed adequate compatibility in all water volumes when not mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL. Example 12 Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 71 / 264 63 / 73 Objective: To evaluate the stability in the application solution with different types of lactofen formulations in conventional field mixtures, using different application volumes. Materials and methods: The test was conducted at the Chimagro SA laboratory in the city of Florencio Varela, Buenos Aires Province. It is registered in the SENASA laboratory network under number 00043. Three different microemulsion compositions of Lactofen (LARS-2102, LARS-2105 and LARS-2109) were evaluated. They were compared with a standard formulation of Lactofen 24% EC. They were tested as a single product in solution and in combination with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL (54% w / v acid equivalent). In turn, the different mixtures were tested at different application volumes (80, 40, 20 and 10 l / ha), with the aim of simulating optimal application conditions for ultra-low water volume situations, which correspond to ground and aerial applications. The doses chosen for the trial were selected based on the doses indicated on the label. The amount of product needed to simulate the different application solutions is shown in column 5 of the table below: Assay Product Dose (l / ha) Volume (l / ha) Volume in test tube (cm3 / 100ml) 1 Lactofen 24% EC 1 80 1.25 2 Lactofen 24% EC + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1 + 2 80 1.25+ 2.5 3 Lactofen 24% EC 1 40 2.5 4 Lactofen 24% EC + salt 1 + 2 40 2.5 + 5.0 Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, p. 72 / 264 64 / 73 potassium de glyphosate 66.2% SL 5 Lactofen 24% EC 1 20 5.0 6 Lactofen 24% EC + salt of potassium de glyphosate 66.2% SL 1 + 2 20 5.0 + 10.0 7 Lactofen 24% EC 1 10 10.0 8 Lactofen 24% EC + salt of potassium de glyphosate 66.2% SL 1 + 2 10 10.0 + 20.0 9 LARS-2102 1 80 1.25 10 LARS-2102 + salt of potassium de glyphosate 66.2% SL 1 + 2 80 1.25+ 2.5 11 LARS-2102 1 40 2.5 12 LARS-2102 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1 + 2 40 2.5 + 5.0 13 LARS-2102 1 20 5.0 14 LARS-2102 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1 + 2 20 5.0 + 10.0 15 LARS-2102 1 10 10.0 16 LARS-2102 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1 + 2 10 10.0 + 20.0 17 LARS-2105 0.5 80 1.25 18 LARS-2105 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.5 + 2 80 1.25+ 2.5 19 LARS-2105 0.5 40 2.5 20 LARS-2105 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.5 + 2 40 2.5 + 5.0 21 LARS-2105 0.5 20 5.0 22 LARS-2105 + potassium salt of glyphosate 66.2% SL 0.5 + 2 20 5.0 + 10.0 23 LARS-2105 0.5 10 10.0 24 LARS-2105 + potassium salt of glyphosate 66.2% SL 0.5 + 2 10 10.0 + 20.0 25 LARS-2109 0.75 80 1.25 26 LARS-2109 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.75 + 2 80 1.25 + 2.5 27 LARS-2109 0.75 40 2.5 28 LARS-2109 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.75 + 2 40 2.5 + 5.0 29 LARS-2109 0.75 20 5.0 30 LARS-2109 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.75 + 2 20 5.0 + 10.0 31 LARS-2109 0.75 10 10.0 32 LARS-2109 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.75 + 2 10 10.0 + 20.0 Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 73 / 264 65 / 73 Columns from the previous table: Test identification number, product tested, dose used in the field, volume of water applied in the field, quantity of formulated product applied in the 100 ml test tube. For the compatibility tests, 100 ml glass test tubes with airtight caps from the IVA brand, with a precision of ± 0.5 ml, were used. To prepare the mixture, 50 ml of water were added first, followed by the amount of lactofen required for each application volume, then glyphosate for the treatments as needed, and finally water to reach the final volume. Once the solution was ready, the container was closed and inverted 10 times, rotating it 180°. After 10 inversions, the test tube is left to stand, and it is observed whether there is any precipitate or supernatant after 30 seconds, 30 minutes, and 2 hours. In the case of solutions in which a precipitate, meniscus, or foam formed, its height was measured. Treatment Product Dose (l / ha) Volume (l / ha) Observations (30 sec) Observations (30 min) Observations (2 hours) 1 Lactofen 24% EC 1 80 Opalescent emulsion Opalescent emulsion Opalescent emulsion 2 Lactofen 24% EC + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1 + 2 80 Opalescent emulsion Opalescent emulsion Opalescent emulsion 3 Lactofen 24% EC 1 40 Opalescent emulsion Opalescent emulsion Opalescent emulsion Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 74 / 264 66 / 73 4 Lactofen 24% EC + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1 + 2 40 Slightly colored opalescent emulsion Slightly colored opalescent emulsion Slightly colored opalescent emulsion with precipitate on the walls 5 Lactofen 24% EC 1 20 Opalescent emulsion Opalescent emulsion Opalescent emulsion 6 Lactofen 24% EC + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1 + 2 20 Slightly colored weak opalescent emulsion Emulsion with 23 ml of precipitate Emulsion with 20 ml of precipitate 7 Lactofen 24% EC 1 10 Opalescent emulsion Opalescent emulsion Opalescent emulsion 8 Lactofen 24% EC + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1 + 2 10 Weak, opalescent, slightly colored emulsion. Emulsion with 23 ml of precipitate. Emulsion with 20 ml of precipitate. 9 LARS-2102 1 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 10 LARS-2102 + potassium salt of glyphosate 66,2% SL 1 + 2 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 11 LARS-2102 1 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 12 LARS-2102 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1 + 2 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 13 LARS-2102 1 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 14 LARS-2102 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1 + 2 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 15 LARS-2102 1 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution, Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 75 / 264 67 / 73 16 LARS-2102 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 1 + 2 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 17 LARS-2105 0.5 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 18 LARS-2105 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.5 + 2 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 19 LARS-2105 0.5 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 20 LARS-2105 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.5 + 2 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 21 LARS-2105 0.5 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 22 LARS-2105 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.5 + 2 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 23 LARS-2105 0.5 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 24 LARS-2105 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.5 + 2 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 25 LARS-2109 0,75 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 26 LARS-2109 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.75 + 2 80 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 27 LARS-2109 0.75 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution, Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 76 / 264 68 / 73 28 LARS-2109 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.75 + 2 40 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 29 LARS-2109 0.75 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 30 LARS-2109 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.75 + 2 20 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 31 LARS-2109 0.75 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution 32 LARS-2109 + glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL 0.75 + 2 10 Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Crystalline solution Columns from the previous table: Test identification number, product tested, field dose used, volume of water applied in the field, observations at 30 sec, 30 min and 2 hours. Conclusions: In all cases, the LARS-2102, LARS-2105, and LARS-2109 products maintained adequate tank compatibility for field application at all application volumes when mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL. For the Lactofen 24% EC product at a volume of 80 l / ha, there was adequate tank compatibility for field application. For volumes of 40, 20, and 10 l / ha, there was no adequate tank compatibility; therefore, field application is not feasible at these volumes. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 77 / 264 69 / 73 All products showed adequate compatibility in all water volumes when not mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL. Example 13 To demonstrate the improved stability of the formulations of the invention, the following studies were conducted following CIPAC guidelines for stability at high and low temperatures for the formulations that are the subject of the invention, comparing them with conventional commercial products that are commonly used in the market. The results obtained demonstrate that the formulation proposed in the present invention is beneficial, since the proposed objectives are effectively achieved. Stability testing at high and low temperatures for formulated products. 1. Objective The objective of the test is to determine the robustness in terms of stability that the formulations exhibit under high and low temperature conditions. Similarly, the values ​​obtained are used to understand the performance the formulation would have after being stored for a maximum period of two years. This last point makes sense when considering that formulations sensitive to high temperatures do not remain stable for two years, the required shelf life for a commercial product. 2. General Methodology 2.1 Stability at elevated temperatures (CIPAC MT 46.3) Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 78 / 264 70 / 73 A certain mass of the product was weighed, and the pH and active ingredient concentration(s) were determined. It was then stored in an oven inside a caramel-colored glass jar for 14 days at 54°C (±2°C). After this period, the sample was removed from the oven and left to stand until it reached room temperature. The concentration of the active ingredient was determined again within 24 hours. Results Product Initial concentration of active substance (% w / v) Final concentration of active substance (% w / v) DERS-1904 30.1 29.8 DERS-1906 20.2 20.1 DERS-1910 40.1 40.0 CERS-1807 19.9 19.8 CERS-1809 27.0 27.1 CERS-1811 13.1 13.0 FORS-1703 12.6 12.7 FORS-1707 25.0 25.1 FORS-1709 16.0 16.0 LARS-2102 12.1 12.0 LARS-2105 24.0 23.8 LARS-2109 17.9 18.1 2.2 Stability at low temperatures (CIPAC MT 39.3) mL (±1 mL) of the formulation to be evaluated were measured in a volumetric flask and then subjected to a temperature of 0°C (±2°C). After one hour under these operating conditions, the occurrence of liquid or solid separation was observed. Subsequently, the sample was kept under these conditions for 7 days, and then phase separation was observed. Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 79 / 264 71 / 73 If the sample became heterogeneous, the volume of each phase was measured. Results Formulation: DERS-1904 1 hour 7 days Volume of separated solids (mL) 0 0 Volume of separated liquid (mL) 0 0 Results Formulation: DERS-1906 1 hour 7 days Volume of separated solids (mL) 0 0 Volume of separated liquid (mL) 0 0 Results Formulation: DERS-1910 1 hour 7 days Volume of separated solids (mL) 0 0 Volume of separated liquid (mL) 0 0 Results Formulation: CERS-1807 1 hour 7 days Volume of separated solids (mL) 0 0 Volume of separated liquid (mL) 0 0 Results Formulation: CERS-1809 1 hour 7 days Volume of separated solids (mL) 0 0 Volume of separated liquid (mL) 0 0 Results Formulation: CERS-1811 1 hour 7 days Volume of separated solids (mL) 0 0 Volume of separated liquid (mL) 0 0 Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 80 / 264 72 / 73 Results Formulation: FORS-1703 1 hour 7 days Volume of separated solids (mL) 0 0 Volume of separated liquid (mL) 0 0 Results Formulation: FORS-1707 1 hour 7 days Volume of separated solids (mL) 0 0 Volume of separated liquid (mL) 0 0 Results Formulation: FORS-1709 1 hour 7 days Volume of separated solids (mL) 0 0 Volume of separated liquid (mL) 0 0 Results Formulation: LARS-2102 1 hour 7 days Volume of separated solids (mL) 0 0 Volume of separated liquid (mL) 0 0 Results Formulation: LARS-2105 1 hour 7 days Volume of separated solids (mL) 0 0 Volume of separated liquid (mL) 0 0 Results Formulation: LARS-2109 1 hour 7 days Volume of separated solids (mL) 0 0 Volume of separated liquid (mL) 0 0 3. Discussion of the results Petition 870220091701, dated 06 / 10 / 2022, page 81 / 264 73 / 73 Based on the analyses performed, it can be concluded that the formulations under study are stable at both high and low temperatures.

Claims

1. A herbicidal composition in the form of a microemulsion (ME), characterized in that the composition comprises: Saturated and unsaturated fatty acid dimethylaminopropalamide 35-45% w / v, Coconut Fat Amine Ethoxylate 7-12% w / v, Ethanol 6-9% w / v, Water 20-30% w / v, Active ingredient 10-40% w / v, said active substance was selected from 2,4-D, Dicamba, Fomesafen and Lactofen.

2. The composition according to claim 1, characterized by comprising: Saturated and unsaturated fatty acid dimethylaminopropalamide 37%, Coconut Fatty Amine Ethoxylate 11%, Ethanol 7%, Water 22% and 2,4-D in its acidic form 30% w / v, the percentages expressed as % w / v in relation to the total formulation.

3. The composition according to claim 1, characterized by comprising: Saturated and unsaturated fatty acid dimethylaminopropalamide 42%, Coconut Fatty Amine Ethoxylate 8%, Ethanol 8%, Water 28% and Dicamba in its acid form 20%, Petition 870250057260, dated 07 / 07 / 2025, page 10 / 29 2 / 4, the percentages expressed as % w / v in relation to the total formulation.

4. The composition according to claim 1, characterized by comprising: Saturated and unsaturated fatty acid dimethylaminopropalamide 45%, Coconut Fatty Amine Ethoxylate 9%, Ethanol 8%, Water 28% and Fomesafen in its acid form 12.5%, the percentages expressed as % w / v in relation to the total formulation.

5. The composition according to claim 1, characterized by comprising: Saturated and unsaturated fatty acid dimethylaminopropalamide 43%, Coconut Fatty Amine Ethoxylate 8%, Ethanol 7%, Water 28% and Lactofen in its acid form 15%, the percentages expressed as % w / v in relation to the total formulation.

6. A method for preparing the composition according to any of the preceding claims, characterized by comprising the steps of: - charging the theoretical quantity of coconut fatty amine ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide into the stirring tank, - adding, under stirring, all the desired ethanol until homogeneity is obtained, Petition 870250057260, dated 07 / 07 / 2025, p.11 / 29 3 / 4 - Add, while stirring, half of the desired water until homogeneous solution is obtained; - Add, while stirring, the total desired quantity of saturated and unsaturated fatty acid dimethylaminopropalamide and stir until complete dissolution is achieved and a crystalline solution is obtained; - Add, while stirring, the total desired quantity of a selected active ingredient of 2,4-D, Dicamba, Fomesafen or Lactofen, and stir until complete dissolution is achieved and a crystalline solution is obtained; - Add, while stirring, the remaining water desired in the formula until homogeneous solution and the final volume are achieved; and - Filter the solution being homogenized.

7. A tank mixture that includes any of the compositions defined in claims 1 to 5 and the mixture is used as a complementary agrochemical component, characterized in that it includes glyphosate, picloram, atrazine, sulfentrazone, cloransulam, mepiquat, paraquat, imazapyr, imazapic, imazethapyr or mixtures thereof.

8. A tank mixture according to claim 7, characterized in that the mixture includes 2,4-D and glyphosate as active components.

9. A tank mixture according to claim 8, characterized in that the glyphosate is in the form of a potassium salt.

10. A tank mixture according to claim 7, characterized in that the mixture includes Dicamba and glyphosate as active components. Petition 870250057260, dated 07 / 07 / 2025, page 12 / 29 4 / 4 11. A tank mixture according to claim 10, characterized in that the glyphosate is in the form of a potassium salt.

12. A tank mixture according to claim 7, characterized in that the mixture includes fomesafen and glyphosate as active components.

13. A tank mixture according to claim 12, characterized in that the glyphosate is in the form of a potassium salt.

14. A tank mixture according to claim 7, characterized in that the mixture includes lactofen and glyphosate as active components.

15. A tank mixture according to claim 14, characterized in that the glyphosate is in the form of a potassium salt.