Low surfactant, ultra-low volume spray, high liquid phase compatible microemulsion herbicide phytosanitary compositions and methods of obtaining

Abstract

Herbicide phytosanitary compositions formulated in the form of microemulsions, with low content of surfactants, high compatibility in ultra-low volume spray solutions, and methods for formulating said compositions and tank mixes.

Description

TECHNICAL FIELD

[0001] The present invention relates to the field of products and active ingredients for pest control, preferably for agriculture, and more specifically to herbicide formulations in the form of microemulsions (ME) comprising an active ingredient selected from 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), 3,6-dichloro-2-methoxybenzoic acid (dicamba), 5-(2-chloro-alpha,alpha,alpha-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy)-N-methylsulfonyl-2-nitrobenzamide (fomesafen) and O-[5-(2-chloro-alpha,alpha,alpha-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy)-2-nitrobenzoyl]-DL-lactic acid ethyl ester (lactofen). The active ingredient is present in its solubilized form in a solvent that acts as a compatibilizer, which means a series of agronomic advantages that will be developed in this application. In fact, the excessive use of surfactants of the compositions of the prior art is thus overcome by the advantageous use of a solvent that will be described in detail below in the formulation to be applied, which in turn fulfills the function of compatibilizer, thus improving the performance of the active ingredient in the formulation of the invention or the solution obtained therefrom. BACKGROUND

[0002] Herbicide resistance is defined as the genetic ability of a weed to survive at doses of herbicides that normally provide effective control. In the Argentine Republic, there are 36 biotypes and 20 weeds that are resistant to herbicides such as glyphosate, selective post-emergence herbicides, imidazolinones, sulfonylureas and triazolopyrimidines and hormones. The practice of mixing one or more herbicides in the spray liquor is a common practice that has many advantages compared to the use of each product alone, thus increasing the spectrum of action and reducing the likelihood of generating new resistances.

[0003] However, the mixing of products can cause adverse effects due to physical and / or chemical incompatibilities.

[0004] Physical incompatibilities are caused by the formulation of the products and their interaction, which can cause the formation of precipitates, phase separation, the formation of solid macro-particles or the clogging of spray tablets, among others.

[0005] This results in a complete loss or reduction of activity of the active ingredients, underdosing or overdosing of the dose applied, inability to apply or high cost of application.

[0006] Among these incompatibilities, the most well-known are those that belong to the herbicide glyphosate and the hormone products, such as 2,4-D and dicamba, fomesafen and lactofen, or other products from the triazines, such as atrazine. These mixtures are widely used in production, since the herbicide glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide worldwide, and therefore the generation of resistance is high, it must be mixed with other products to guarantee weed control.

[0007] The search for new alternatives to improve control, the use of pre-emergence herbicides has increased significantly. Therefore, the tank-mixes have gone from two products in most cases to more than three products, resulting in an increase in the concentration of the formulated products, which worsens the stability conditions.

[0008] Another important aspect to be considered regarding physical incompatibility is the amount of water used to make the tank-mix. With an increase in the volume, the compatibility increases, for example, if the volume is increased by 80 l / ha (which is the maximum volume used in the field for herbicides), in most cases the incompatibility decreases, but if the volume is reduced, the mixture is more incompatible because there is more interaction between each other. The use of smaller amounts of water in solution is driven by several factors: scarcity of resources, difficulty of access and economy of application or application techniques, where aerial application uses small amounts of water, for example, in extreme cases 10 l / ha (liters per hectare).

[0009] The examples provided below are just a small part of the mixtures used in the field, where most of the time the conditions of the mixtures worsen, resulting in greater instability.

[0010] Compositions of 2,4-D and dicamba in acid form formulated as microemulsions are known. In the closest documents known to the inventors, the patents US 6803345 B2, US 7094735 B2 and the published applications US 2011 / 0281731 and US 2014 / 0005052 A1 can be cited in particular.

[0011] The patent US 6803345 B2 refers to a concentrate that forms a microemulsion comprising 2,4-D and dicamba in acid form and many other active ingredients. The patent discloses the absence of organic solvents and water as essential parts in the concentrate. It also refers to the fact that the concentrate comprises active ingredients and a high proportion of surfactants.

[0012] The patent US 7094735 B2 refers to a microemulsion comprising 2,4-D and dicamba in acid form and several other active ingredients. The microemulsion disclosed in the document must comprise an acidifying agent, since it is necessary to raise the pH to the pKa of the active ingredients used.

[0013] Both documents cited above are mainly based on the use of surfactants (emulsifiers) as solvents.

[0014] The publication of the application US 2011 / 0281731 describes an emulsifiable concentrate comprising herbicides, a solvent, a mixture of emulsifiers, a co-solvent and water. The document also describes that the organic solvent also fulfills a second anti-freezing and anti-gelification function. The document describes an emulsifiable concentrate that can be defined as typical.

[0015] Patent application US 2014 / 0005052 A1 describes a microemulsion comprising a herbicide in acid form, a polar co-solvent, at least one non-ionic surfactant, at least one anionic surfactant and water. This document also describes the function of anionic and non-ionic surfactants as solvents. This application is technically in the formulation type of documents US 6803345 B2 and US 7094735 B2, differing in that it is a microemulsion (ME) and not a concentrate that forms a microemulsion (CFM), in which a large amount of surfactant is used.

[0016] This application is fundamentally different from previous applications, as it provides a novel formulation, both in terms of ingredients and their percentages, which allows the replacement of the excessive use of surfactants with a better quality solvent that also fulfills the function of a compatibility agent, improving the performance of the product in solution, among other things. In previous patents and applications, surfactants or mixtures thereof are given a dominant role, in which 4 to 6 times the amount required in this application is usually used.

[0017] Although the pH value in the prior art is an important factor, for example depending on the active ingredient being 1.9 to 3.4, this fact represents an unnecessary risk for operators, applicators and all personnel involved in the chain, from production to field application.

[0018] On the other hand, although surfactants are low-toxicity products, the same precautions as with any herbicide should be taken when handling them. They are used in high concentrations, which can cause damage to crops, in addition to the fact that when they are used in high concentrations, they increase the additional cost, which is to be avoided. SUMMARY

[0019] Therefore, it is an object of the present application to provide a novel composition for formulating a plant quarantine product that allows ultra-low volume application, while 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.

[0020] It is another object of the present application to provide a herbicide plant quarantine composition in the form of a microemulsion, in which the active ingredient, for example 2,4-D, dicamba, fomesafen or lactofen, achieves greater solubility in the formulation without the need for modifications.

[0021] It is another object of the present application to provide a herbicide plant quarantine composition in the form of a microemulsion, in which greater bioavailability and biological efficacy of the active ingredient are provided, since physical and chemical losses during and after the formation of the solution during spraying are minimized.

[0022] Another object of the present application is to provide a herbicide phytosanitary composition in the form of microemulsion, wherein due to the modified solubilizing solvent of the present application, there is a physical-chemical compatibility with other formulations in the tank mix.

[0023] Another object of the present application is to provide a herbicide phytosanitary composition in the form of microemulsion, which has a new type of solvent that acts simultaneously as a compatibilizer in the formulation.

[0024] Another object of the present application is to provide a herbicide phytosanitary composition in the form of microemulsion, which has a lower dose / usage of active ingredient per hectare, and therefore less residue in the crop, which has a much smaller impact on the environment.

[0025] Another object of the present application is to provide a herbicide phytosanitary composition in the form of microemulsion, which allows to reduce the cost of application by reducing the amount of solution required to be applied per hectare.

[0026] Another object of the present application is to provide a herbicide phytosanitary composition in the form of microemulsion, which uses a solvent that also acts as a compatibilizer, but at the expense of surfactant overload, thus achieving a reduction of 50-70% described in the literature of the state of the art, with a minimum of 7-12% in the present application.

[0027] Another object of the present application is to provide a composition of herbicides 2,4-D, dicamba, benzfendizam or lactofen, which when their ingredients, such as surfactants and solvents, are mixed in the appropriate amounts, allow the formulation to have the desired properties.

[0028] Another object of the present application is to provide a herbicide phytosanitary composition in the form of microemulsion, which allows to obtain a formulation of the composition that exhibits the aforementioned characteristics, by including the use of a defined amount of solvent / compatibilizer combined with surfactants, which allows to obtain improved properties.

[0029] Another object of the present application is to provide a composition in the form of microemulsion (ME), which is highly compatible in the spray liquor, even in ultra-low volume applications, wherein said composition comprises:

[0030]

[0031] Said active ingredient is selected from 2,4-D, dicamba, benzfendizam or lactofen.

[0032] Another object of the present application is to provide a process for the preparation of the composition of the present application, wherein said process comprises the steps of:

[0033] - charging a theoretical amount of a coconut oil fatty amine ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide, in a stirred tank,

[0034] - all the required ethanol is added under stirring until homogeneity is reached,

[0035] - half of the required water is added under stirring until homogeneity is reached,

[0036] - all the required amount of dimethylaminopropylamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids is loaded under stirring and stirring is maintained until complete dissolution is achieved and a crystalline solution is obtained,

[0037] - all the required amount of active ingredient selected from 2,4-D, dicamba, fomesafen or lactofen is loaded under stirring and stirring is maintained until complete dissolution is achieved and a crystalline solution is obtained,

[0038] - the remaining required water in the formulation is added under stirring until homogeneity and final volume are reached, and

[0039] - the solution thus homogenized is filtered.

[0040] Another object of the present invention is to provide a tank mix comprising any of the compositions of the present invention, wherein glyphosate, picloram, atrazine, mesosulfuron-methyl, chlorsulfuron, mepiquat, paraquat, imazapyr, imazapic, imazethapyr or mixtures thereof are used as supplementary pesticide ingredients. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0041] Referring now in detail to the compositions of the present invention, it can be noted that the invention provides a novel phytosanitary composition formulated as a microemulsion, which is stable due to the development of a modified solvent / compatibilizer that keeps the active ingredients such as 2,4-D, dicamba, fomesafen or lactofen completely dissolved and protected, which in turn confers it the particular characteristic of being the object of the present invention as mentioned above.

[0042] More specifically, the compositions of the present invention comprise:

[0043] 35-45% dimethylaminopropylamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids (DPAG) as solvent / compatibilizer,

[0044] 7-12% of coconut fatty amine ethoxylate as surfactant,

[0045] 6-9% of ethanol as diluent,

[0046] 20-30% of water as carrier, and

[0047] 10-30% of active ingredient selected from 2,4-D, dicamba, fomesafen and lactofen.

[0048] The percentages mentioned above are expressed in % w / V with respect to the total formulation.

[0049] The general and physical-chemical characteristics of each of the ingredients used in the formulation of the present application are detailed below.

[0050] The compound used as solvent, which constitutes an essential ingredient in the formulation of the present application, is dimethylaminopropionamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids, which corresponds to the following formula:

[0051]

[0052] wherein R is a saturated and / or unsaturated fatty acid selected from the group consisting of hexanoic acid, decanoic acid, myristic acid, palmitoleic acid, stearic acid, linoleic acid, octanoic acid, lauric acid, palmitic acid, arachidic acid, oleic acid.

[0053] Preferably, the fatty acid is obtained from at least soybean oil, coconut oil, sunflower oil, cottonseed oil or a combination thereof.

[0054] The solvent based on soybean oil has a pH of 10.8 to 11.8, a density of 0.895-0.905 g / cm3 at 20°C and a refractive index of 1.468-1.472 at 20°C.

[0055] The oil can also be coconut oil, the solvent having a pH of 10.4 to 11.7, a density of 0.87-0.89 g / cm3 at 20°C and a refractive index of 1.439-1.445 at 20°C.

[0056] The solvent can also consist of a mixture of 30% soybean oil and 70% coconut oil, having a pH of 10.5-11.4, a density of 0.87-0.89 g / cm3 at 20°C and a refractive index of 1.439-1.445 at 20°C.

[0057] 1) dimethylaminopropionamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids:

[0058] Physical state: liquid above 20°C, below this temperature it is an amber waxy solid,

[0059] Odor: characteristic of amines,

[0060] Color: amber to dark caramel,

[0061] pH at 20°C 11.7-12.9,

[0062] Melting point: 20°C,

[0063] Flammability: not flammable,

[0064] Density: 0.90 g / cm3 (20°C),

[0065] Solubility in water: emulsifiable,

[0066] Free amine < 4 meq / g,

[0067] Refractive index = 1.472,

[0068] 2) Coconut fatty amine ethoxylate, 15 mol EO:

[0069] Physical state: liquid above 25°C,

[0070] pH: basic,

[0071] Amine value: 55-75,

[0072] HLB: 15.43,

[0073] Maximum humidity < 1%,

[0074] 3) Ethanol:

[0075] Appearance: colorless transparent liquid

[0076] Odor: characteristic,

[0077] Boiling point: 78.5°C,

[0078] Melting point: -114.1°C,

[0079] Flash point: 13°C,

[0080] Auto-ignition temperature: 425°C,

[0081] Vapor pressure: (20°C) 59 mbar,

[0082] Density (20 / 4): 0.804,

[0083] Solubility: miscible with water.

[0084] The active ingredient used in the formulation of the present invention is selected from 2,4-D, dicamba, fomesafen and lactofen, used without altering its chemical structure, since it is completely soluble in the modified solvent / compatibilizer, even in its acid form, and the resulting formulation is soluble in water. It is precisely for this reason that it is not necessary to salify it to make it subsequently soluble in water, nor to esterify it by reacting it with an alcohol in order to later introduce the new molecule thus modified into a conventional emulsion.

[0085] Since the active ingredient is completely dissolved in the solvent of the present invention, it does not undergo a significant exchange with the cations present in hard water nor does it compete with the cations of the salts of other pesticides added to the solution of the tank-mix. This quality makes it highly compatible with other pesticides and water, avoiding the waste of the pesticides in solution due to their precipitation by the generation of new insoluble salts and preventing the clogging of the nozzles by these salts. All of the above implies an improvement in the overall performance of the application solution. This property is particularly desirable and effective in ultra-low volume (ULV) applications, where due to the scarcity of water resources, aerial application is carried out or simply the application is optimized, using small amounts of water in the solution. Active ingredients that can be tank-mixed with the formulation of the present invention include glyphosate, picloram, atrazine, mesosulfuron-methyl, cloransulam acid, mepiquat, paraquat, imazapyr, imazapic, imazethapyr or mixtures thereof. Despite the foregoing, the preferred use of glyphosate will be explained below.

[0086] The specific combination of solvent / compatibilizer and surfactant achieves a stable microemulsion, achieving a higher agronomic efficiency, since it remains intact even at very demanding dilutions, reaching micelles of less than 50 nanometers. In turn, this mixture can minimize physicochemical losses such as photolysis, hydrolysis, drift, bounce, roll, break or stick.

[0087] In addition to the above characteristics, the composition has greater penetration, which is inherent since it is in the form of a microemulsion. The active ingredient is in acid form, which means greater biological activity than salts and esters, and it contains a modified solvent as a compatibilizer, which can reduce the losses of active ingredient, resulting in a significant reduction in the active substance required for weed control compared to the products of the prior art.

[0088] To demonstrate the above advantages, the following tests were carried out using the formulation object of the present invention, comparing them with conventional commercial products commonly used on the market. The results obtained indicate that the formulation proposed in the present invention is beneficial since it practically achieves the proposed objectives.

[0089] The preferred formulation of the present invention is detailed below, in which the active ingredient 2,4-D is microemulsified in its acid form:

[0090] 30% w / v of 2,4-D in acid form,

[0091] 37% w / v of dimethylaminopropylamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids,

[0092] 7% w / v of ethanol,

[0093] 11.0% w / v of coco fatty amine ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide, and

[0094] 22.0% w / v water.

[0095] The preferred formulation of the present application is detailed below, wherein the active ingredient clodinafop-propargyl is microemulsified in its acid form:

[0096] 20% w / v clodinafop-propargyl in its acid form,

[0097] 42% w / v dimethylaminopropylamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids,

[0098] 8% w / v ethanol,

[0099] 8% w / v coco fatty amine ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide, and

[0100] 28% w / v water.

[0101] The preferred formulation of the present application is detailed below, wherein the active ingredient clodinafop-propargyl is microemulsified in its acid form:

[0102] 12.5% w / v clodinafop-propargyl in its acid form,

[0103] 45.0% w / v dimethylaminopropylamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids,

[0104] 8.0% w / v ethanol,

[0105] 9.0% w / v coco fatty amine ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide, and

[0106] 28.0% w / v water.

[0107] Finally, the preferred formulation of the present application is detailed below, wherein the active ingredient lactofen is microemulsified in its acid form:

[0108] 15% w / v lactofen in its acid form,

[0109] 43% w / v dimethylaminopropylamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids,

[0110] 7% w / v ethanol,

[0111] 8% w / v coco fatty amine ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide, and

[0112] 28% w / v water.

[0113] Example 1

[0114] Preferred formulations are obtained

[0115] 1. General features of the process: The formulation process is carried out in batch mode (batch of 10000 L).

[0116] - 1100 kg of coconut fatty amine ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide were loaded into the stirred tank.

[0117] - 700 kg of ethanol, as indicated in the formulation, were added under stirring until homogenization was achieved.

[0118] - 1100 kg of water were added under stirring until homogenization was achieved.

[0119] - 3700 kg of dimethylaminopropylamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids were loaded under stirring until complete dissolution and a crystalline solution was obtained.

[0120] - 3000 kg of active ingredient 2,4-D were loaded under stirring until complete dissolution and a crystalline solution was obtained.

[0121] - 1100 kg of water were added under stirring until homogenization and final volume were achieved.

[0122] - The product was filtered and quality controlled, and after approval it was released for packaging.

[0123] 2. Equipment used:

[0124] The following equipment made of stainless steel was used:

[0125] Stirred tank,

[0126] Centrifugal pump,

[0127] Finished product storage tank,

[0128] Packaging machine.

[0129] 3. Conditions controlled in the process:

[0130] - Solubilization temperature of the active ingredient, not more than 45°C,

[0131] - Final density of the mixture, kept within the parameter range of 1.050-1.100 g / ml at 20°C,

[0132] - Final pH of the mixture kept within the parameter range of 5.4-5.9,

[0133] - Final color of the mixture is crystalline amber.

[0134] Example 2

[0135] Preferred formulations were obtained

[0136] 1. General characteristics of the process: The formulation process was carried out in batch mode (batch of 10000 L).

[0137] - 800 kg of coconut fatty amine ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide were loaded into the stirred tank.

[0138] - 800 kg of ethanol as indicated in the formulation were added under stirring until homogenization was achieved.

[0139] - 1400 kg of water were added under stirring until homogenization was achieved.

[0140] - 4200 kg of dimethylaminopropylamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids were loaded under stirring until complete dissolution and a crystalline solution was obtained.

[0141] - 2000 kg of active ingredient clomazone were loaded under stirring until complete dissolution and a crystalline solution was obtained.

[0142] - 1400 kg of water were added under stirring until homogenization and final volume were achieved.

[0143] - The product was filtered and quality controlled, and after approval it was released for packaging.

[0144] 2. Equipment used:

[0145] The following equipment made of stainless steel was used:

[0146] Stirred tank,

[0147] Centrifugal pump,

[0148] Finished product storage tank,

[0149] Packaging machine.

[0150] 3. Conditions controlled in the process:

[0151] - Temperature of dissolution of the active ingredient, not more than 45°C,

[0152] - Final density of the mixture, kept within the parameter range of 1.060-1.080 g / ml at 20°C,

[0153] - Final pH of the mixture kept within the parameter range of 4.6-5.0,

[0154] - Final color of the mixture is crystalline amber.

[0155] Example 3

[0156] Preferred formulations were obtained

[0157] 1. General characteristics of the process: The formulation process was carried out in batch mode (batch of 10000 L).

[0158] - 900 kg of coconut fatty amine ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide were charged into the stirred tank.

[0159] - 800 kg of ethanol as indicated in the formulation were added under stirring until homogenization was achieved.

[0160] - 1400 kg of water were added under stirring until homogenization was achieved.

[0161] - 4500 kg of dimethylaminopropylamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids were charged under stirring until complete dissolution and a crystalline solution was obtained.

[0162] - 1250 kg of active ingredient, benodanil, were charged under stirring until complete dissolution and a crystalline solution was obtained.

[0163] - 1400 kg of water were added under stirring until homogenization and final volume were achieved.

[0164] - The product was filtered and quality controlled, and after approval it was released for packaging.

[0165] 2. Equipment used:

[0166] The following equipment made of stainless steel was used:

[0167] Stirred tank,

[0168] Centrifugal pump,

[0169] Finished product tank,

[0170] Packaging machine.

[0171] 3. Conditions controlled in the process:

[0172] - Solubilization temperature of the active ingredient, not more than 45°C,

[0173] - Final density of the mixture, kept within the parameter range of 1.035-1.044 g / ml at 20°C,

[0174] - Final pH of the mixture kept within the parameter range of 6.5-7.5,

[0175] - Final color of the mixture is crystalline amber.

[0176] Example 4

[0177] Preferred formulations were obtained

[0178] 1. General characteristics of the process: The formulation process was carried out in batch mode (batch of 10000 L).

[0179] - 800 kg of coconut fatty amine ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide were charged into the stirred tank.

[0180] - 700 kg of ethanol as indicated in the formulation were added under stirring until homogenization was achieved.

[0181] - 1400 kg of water were added under stirring until homogenization was achieved.

[0182] - 4300 kg of dimethylaminopropylamide of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids were charged under stirring until complete dissolution and a crystalline solution was obtained.

[0183] - 1500 kg of active ingredient lactofen were charged under stirring until complete dissolution and a crystalline solution was obtained.

[0184] - 1400 kg of water were added under stirring until homogenization and final volume were achieved.

[0185] - The product was filtered and quality controlled, and after approval it was released for packaging.

[0186] 2. Equipment used:

[0187] The following equipment made of stainless steel was used:

[0188] Stirred tank,

[0189] Centrifugal pump,

[0190] Finished product storage tank,

[0191] Packaging machine.

[0192] 3. Description of the conditions controlled in the process:

[0193] - Solubilization temperature of the active ingredient, not more than 45°C,

[0194] - Final density of the mixture, kept within the parameter range of 1.035-1.045 g / ml at 20°C,

[0195] - Final pH of the mixture kept within the parameter range of 6.5-7.5,

[0196] - Final color of the mixture is crystalline amber.

[0197] Example 5

[0198] The following tests show how the different microemulsion formulations of the present application control the target weeds by reducing the amount of active ingredient applied per hectare and how they behave in tank mixes.

[0199]

[0200] Materials and methods:

[0201] The test was carried out in a field in Sánchez Bs As town (33°26'1.76" S; 60°10'10.01" W).

[0202] In Vertic Argiudoll, Fine, Illite, Thermal soil (USDA-Soil Taxonomy V. 2006), the volume used was: II w.

[0203] The experimental design used was a completely randomized block design (DBCA). The plots of each treatment were 2 m wide x 10 m long, with paired controls and with a buffer zone of 1 m wide x 10 m long. Each treatment was repeated 4 times.

[0204] Three different 2,4-D microemulsion compositions were evaluated, namely DERS-1904, DERS-1906 and DERS-1910, defined in the table above. They were compared with three standard formulations of 2,4-D, 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 with a blank control with no application.

[0205] Each formulation product was evaluated with two labeled doses and two application volumes (40 and 80 l / ha).

[0206] Glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL at a dose of 2 l / ha was added to all the treatments.

[0207]

[0208]

[0209] Treatment Product Dose (l / ha) Volume (l / ha) 14 Control 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 2,4-d choline salt 66.9% SL 1.5 40 22 2,4-d choline salt 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 dimethylamine salt 60% SL 0.96 40 26 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL 1.4 40

[0210] *Since 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, these treatments were not applied.

[0211] The herbicides were sprayed on the corn stubble to complete coverage. For this purpose, a truck equipped with a CO2 spray backpack and four flat fan tablets was used. Flat fan tablets (TT110015) were used at 2 bar pressure and 0.52 m peak to peak. The average speed was 6.9 km / ha and the droplet size reached was medium (175-250 microns).

[0212] Application date was November 20, 2019

[0213] Conyza bonariensis "Black Branch" was in phenological stage of growth 7 to 10 cm in height at the time of application.

[0214] Weather conditions were:

[0215] T(℃) 28.2 HR (%) 56 *T(℃) 6 Speed (km / h) 5.5

[0216] The method used to evaluate the control effect of the treatments on the grass was the one proposed by ALAM at 7, 14 and 21 DAA (days after application).

[0217] Results:

[0218]

[0219]

[0220] Conclusions: In the three evaluations, there was a significant difference between the absolute control (TA) and the application treatments.

[0221] In the three evaluations, there was a significant difference between the application treatments, both between the same products and between different formulations at different doses.

[0222] Considering the minimum dose applied, the reduction in the amount of active ingredient per hectare was 50-65% and the three formulations (DERS-1904, DERS-1906 and DERS-1910) obtained similar, equal or higher control, relative to the traditional formulation on the market.

[0223] Considering the maximum dose applied, the reduction in the amount of active ingredient per hectare was 48-68% and the three formulations (DERS-1904, DERS-1906 and DERS-1910) obtained similar, equal or higher control, relative to the traditional formulation on the market.

[0224] All the formulations used obtained a control higher than 80% at 21 DAA.

[0225] Example 6

[0226] The following tests show how the different microemulsion formulations of the present invention control the target grasses by reducing the amount of active ingredient applied per hectare and how they behave in tank mix.

[0227]

[0228] Materials and methods:

[0229] The test was carried out in a field in the town of Sánchez Bs As (33°26'1.76" S; 60°10'10.01" W).

[0230] In Vertic Argiudoll, Fine, Illite, Thermal soil (USDA-Soil Taxonomy V. 2006), the volume used was II w.

[0231] The experimental design used was a completely randomized block design (DBCA). The plots of each treatment were 2 m wide x 10 m long, with paired controls and with a buffer zone of 1 m wide x 10 m long. Each treatment was repeated 4 times.

[0232] Three different compositions of clopyralid microemulsions (CERS-1807 and CERS-1809 and CERS-1811) were evaluated. They were compared with two standard formulations of clopyralid (clopyralid dimethylamine salt 57.8% SL and clopyralid diglycolamine salt 70.8% SL) and a blank control without application.

[0233] Each formulation product was evaluated with two labeled doses and two application volumes (40 1 / ha and 80 1 / ha).

[0234] Glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL at a dose of 2 1 / ha was added to all the treatments.

[0235]

[0236]

[0237] *Since the products clopyralid dimethylamine salt 57.8% SL and clopyralid diglycolamine salt 70.8% SL showed incompatibility in the tank when mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL at a volume of 40 1 / ha, these treatments were not used.

[0238] The herbicides were sprayed on the corn stover to complete coverage. For this, a truck equipped with a CO2 spray backpack and four flat fan tablets was used. The flat fan tablets (TT110015) were used at 2 bar pressure and 0.52 m peak to peak. The average speed was 6.9 km / ha and the droplet size reached was medium (175-250 microns).

[0239] The application date was November 20, 2019

[0240] The Vervain "Black Stems" were in the phenological stage of growth from 7 to 10 cm in height at the time of application.

[0241] The weather conditions were:

[0242] T(℃) 28.2 HR (%) 56 *T(℃) 6 Speed (km / h) 5.5

[0243] The method used to assess the control effect of the treatments on the grasses was the one proposed by ALAM at 7, 14 and 21 DAA.

[0244] Results:

[0245]

[0246]

[0247] Conclusions: In the three evaluations, there were significant differences between the absolute control (TA) and the application treatments.

[0248] In the three evaluations, there were significant differences between the application treatments, both between the same products and between different formulations at different doses.

[0249] Considering the minimum dose applied, the reduction in the amount of active ingredient per hectare was between 58% and 72%, obtaining similar, equal or higher control with the three formulations (CERS-1807 and CERS-1809 and CERS-1811) with respect to the traditional formulation on the market.

[0250] Considering the maximum dose applied, the reduction in the amount of active ingredient per hectare was between 56% and 66%, obtaining similar, equal or higher control with the three formulations (CERS-1807 and CERS-1809 and CERS-1811) with respect to the traditional formulation on the market.

[0251] All the formulations used obtained a control higher than 80% at 21 DAA.

[0252] Example 7

[0253] The following test shows how the different microemulsion formulations of the present application control the target grasses by reducing the amount of active ingredient applied per hectare and how they behave in a tank mix.

[0254]

[0255] Materials and methods:

[0256] The test was carried out in a field in the town of Sánchez Bs As (33°26'1.76" S; 60°10'10.01" W).

[0257] In Vertic Argiudoll, Fine, Illite, Thermal soil (USDA-Soil Taxonomy V. 2006), using the capacity: II w.

[0258] The experimental design used was a completely randomized block design (DBCA). Plots for each treatment were 2 m wide x 10 m long, with paired controls and with a 1 m wide x 10 m long buffer zone. Each treatment was replicated 4 times.

[0259] Three different fluridone microemulsion compositions (FORS-1703, FORS-1707 and FORS-1709) were evaluated. They were compared to the standard formulation of fluridone (fluridone sodium salt 26.2% SL) and to a blank control with no application.

[0260] Each formulation product was evaluated with two labeled doses and two application volumes (40 and 80 l / ha).

[0261] Glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL at a dose of 2 l / ha was added to all treatments.

[0262] Treatment Product Dose (l / ha) Volume (l / ha) 1 Control 0 80 2 FORS-1703 1.3 80 3 FORS-1707 0.65 80 4 FORS-1709 1.0 80 5 fomesafen-sodium salt 26.2% SL 1.3 80

[0263] Treatment Product Dose (l / ha) Volume (l / ha) 6 Control 0 40 7 FORS-1703 1.3 40 8 FORS-1707 0.65 40 9 FORS-1709 1.0 40 10 fomesafen-sodium salt 26.2% SL 1.3 40

[0264] * Since the product fluridone sodium salt 26.2% SL showed incompatibility in the tank mix with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL at a volume of 40 l / ha, these treatments were not applied.

[0265] The herbicides were sprayed on the soybean crop for complete coverage. For this, a truck equipped with a CO2 spray backpack and four flat fan tablets was used. Flat fan tablets (TT110015) were used at 2 bar pressure and 0.52 m peak to peak. The average speed was 6.9 km / ha and the droplet size reached was medium (175-250 microns).

[0266] The application date was December 6, 2019

[0267] The Vochysia divergens "black shoots" were in the phenological stage of growth from 10 to 15 cm in height at the time of application.

[0268] The weather conditions were:

[0269] T(℃) 31.3 HR (%) 62 *T(℃) 6 Speed (km / h) 4.2

[0270] The method used to evaluate the efficacy of weed control and phytotoxicity produced by the treatments in the crop was that proposed by ALAM at 7, 14 and 21 DAA.

[0271] Results:

[0272] Control efficacy:

[0273]

[0274] Control efficacy:

[0275] No phytotoxicity was produced in the crop with the treatments.

[0276] Conclusions: There was a significant difference between the absolute control (TA) and the application of the treatments in the three-day evaluation.

[0277] Considering the dose applied per hectare, the reduction in the amount of active ingredient was 50% and the three formulations (FORS-1703, FORS-1707 and FORS-1709) obtained equal or higher control, in relation to the traditional formulation on the market.

[0278] All the formulations used obtained a control higher than 90% at 21 DAA.

[0279] Example 8

[0280] The following tests show how the different microemulsion formulations of the present application control the target weeds by reducing the amount of active ingredient applied per hectare and how they behave in tank mix.

[0281]

[0282] Materials and methods:

[0283] The test was carried out in a field in the town of Sánchez Bs As (33°26'1.76" S; 60°10'10.01" W).

[0284] In Vertic Argiudoll, Fine, Illite, Thermal soil (USDA-Soil Taxonomy V. 2006), the volume used was II w.

[0285] The experimental design used was a completely randomized block design (DBCA). The plots of each treatment were 2 m wide x 10 m long, with paired controls and with a buffer zone of 1 m wide x 10 m long. Each treatment was repeated 4 times.

[0286] Three different combinations of Lactofen microemulsions (LARS-2102, LARS-2105 and LARS-2109) were evaluated. They were compared with the standard formulation of Lactofen (Lactofen 24% EC) and with a blank control without application.

[0287] Each formulation product was evaluated with two labeled doses and two application volumes (40 1 / ha and 80 1 / ha).

[0288] Glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL at a dose of 2 1 / ha was added to all the treatments.

[0289] Treatment Product Dose (l / ha) Volume (l / ha) 1 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 Control 0 40 7 LARS-2102 1 40 8 LARS-2105 1 40 9 LARS-2109 1 40 10 lactofen 24% EC 1 40

[0290] As the product Lactofen 24% EC showed incompatibility in the tank when mixed with Glyphosate Potassium 66.2% SL at the rate of 40 l / ha, these treatments were not applied.

[0291] The herbicides were sprayed on the soybean crop for complete coverage. For this, a truck equipped with a CO2 spray backpack and four flat fan tablets was used. Flat fan tablets (TT110015) were used at 2 bar pressure and 0.52 m peak to peak. The average speed was 6.9 km / ha and the droplet size reached was medium (175-250 microns).

[0292] The application date was December 6, 2019

[0293] The Vassourao grass "black shoots" were in the phenological stage of growth with height between 10 and 15 cm at the time of application.

[0294] The weather conditions were:

[0295] T(℃) 31.3 HR (%) 62 *T(℃) 6 Speed (km / h) 4.2

[0296] The method used to evaluate the efficacy of weed control and phytotoxicity generated by the treatments in the crop was that proposed by ALAM at 7, 14 and 21 DAA.

[0297] Results:

[0298] Efficacy of control:

[0299]

[0300] Phytotoxicity:

[0301] No treatment generated phytotoxicity in the crop.

[0302] Conclusion:

[0303] There was a significant difference between the absolute control (TA) and the application treatments in the evaluation of three days.

[0304] Considering the dose applied per hectare, with a reduction of 50% in the amount of active ingredient, the three types of formulations (LARS-2102, LARS-2105 and LARS-2109) obtained equal or higher control, in relation to the traditional formulation on the market.

[0305] All the formulations used obtained a control higher than 90% at 21 DAA.

[0306] To demonstrate the high compatibility with other pesticides in ultra-low volume (ULV) applications, the following laboratory studies were carried out with the formulations object of the present application and they were compared with conventional commercial products commonly used in the market. The results obtained indicate that these formulations allow to obtain sufficient compatibility even at very low dilutions, which is beneficial.

[0307] Example 9

[0308] Objective: To evaluate the stability of application solutions with different types of 2,4-D formulations in conventional field mixtures using different application rates.

[0309] Materials and methods:

[0310] The test was carried out in the laboratory of Chimagro S.A. in the town of Florencio Varela, province of Bs As. It was registered in the SENASA laboratory network with the number 00043.

[0311] Three different 2,4-D microemulsion compositions (DERS-1904, DERS-1906 and DERS-1910) were evaluated. They were compared with three standard formulations of 2,4-D (i.e. 2,4-d choline salt 66.9% SL, 2,4-D 2-ethylhexyl ester 97% EC and 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL). They were tested as the only product in solution and in combination with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL, acid equivalent 54% w / v.

[0312] In turn, different mixtures were tested at different application rates (80, 40, 20 and 10 l / ha) with the aim of simulating the best application conditions as ultra-low water volume situations corresponding to land and aerial application.

[0313] The doses chosen for the test were selected taking into account the maximum label dose.

[0314] The following table, column 5, shows the amount of product required to simulate the different application solutions:

[0315]

[0316]

[0317]

[0318] Column of the above table: test identification number, product tested, field dose used, amount of water applied to the field, amount of formulation product applied in a 100 ml test tube.

[0319] For the compatibility test, 100 ml glass test tubes with IVA brand sealed caps were used, with a precision of + 0.5 ml. For the preparation of the mixtures, 50 ml of water were first placed, then the amount required for each application rate of 2,4-D, then the glyphosate for the treatment (as appropriate), and finally, water was completed to the final volume.

[0320] After the solution was completed, the container was closed and inverted 10 times, turning it 180°.

[0321] After the 10 inversions, the test tubes were left standing and observed for the presence of precipitate or supernatant at 30 seconds, 30 minutes, and 2 hours, respectively.

[0322] In the case of solutions in which a precipitate, meniscus, or foam was formed, their height was then measured.

[0323] The results obtained:

[0324]

[0325]

[0326]

[0327]

[0328] Columns of the above table: test identification number, product tested, field dose used, amount of water applied to the field, observation results at 30 seconds, 30 minutes, and 2 hours.

[0329] Conclusions:

[0330] In all cases, the DERS-1904, DERS-1906, and DERS-1910 products, when mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL, maintained adequate tank-mix compatibility for field application at all application rates. Likewise, 2,4-D 2-ethylhexyl ester 97% EC also maintained adequate tank-mix compatibility at all application rates.

[0331] For the products 2,4-D dimethylamine salt 60% SL and 2,4-d choline salt 66.9% SL, the 80 l / ha capacity maintained adequate tank-mix compatibility for field application. For the 40, 20, and 10 l / ha capacities, it did not maintain adequate tank-mix compatibility, so field application at these capacities is not feasible.

[0332] When not mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL, all products showed adequate compatibility in water at all capacities.

[0333] Example 10

[0334] Objective: To evaluate the stability of application solutions with different types of formulation of dicamba in conventional field mixtures using different application rates.

[0335] Materials and methods:

[0336] The test was carried out in the laboratory of Chimagro S.A. in the town of Florencio Varela, province of Bs As. It was registered in the SENASA laboratory network under number 00043.

[0337] Three different compositions of dicamba microemulsions (CERS-1807, CERS-1809 and CERS-1811) were evaluated. They were compared with two standard formulations of dicamba (dicamba-dimethylamine salt 57.8% SL and dicamba-diglycolamine salt 70.8% SL). They were tested as single products in solution and in combination with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL (acid equivalent 54% w / v).

[0338] In turn, the different mixtures were tested at different application rates (80, 40, 20 and 10 l / ha) in order to simulate the optimal application conditions as ultra-low water volume situations corresponding to ground and aerial application.

[0339] The doses chosen for the test were established according to the maximum label dose.

[0340] The following table shows the amount of product required to simulate the different application solutions:

[0341]

[0342]

[0343] Table column: test identification number, product tested, field dose used, amount of water applied to the field, amount of formulation product applied in a 100 ml test tube.

[0344] For the compatibility test, 100 ml glass test tubes with IVA brand sealed caps were used, with a precision of + 0.5 ml. For the preparation of the mixtures, 50 ml of water were first placed, then the amount required for each application rate of dicamba, then the glyphosate for the treatment (as appropriate), and finally water to complete the final volume. After the solution was completed, the container was closed and inverted 10 times, turning it 180°.

[0345]

[0346]

[0347]

[0348] After 10 inversions, the test tubes were left standing and observed for any precipitate or supernatant at 30 seconds, 30 minutes and 2 hours.

[0349] Then, in the case of solutions that formed a precipitate, meniscus or foam, their height was measured.

[0350] Results:

[0351] Column of the table above: test identification number, product tested, field dose used, amount of water applied to the field, observation at 30 seconds, 30 minutes and 2 hours.

[0352] Conclusions:

[0353] In all cases, the CERS-1807, CERS-1809 and CERS-1811 products, when mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL, maintained sufficient tank-mix compatibility for field application at all application rates.

[0354] For the products dicamba dimethylamine salt 57.8% SL and dicamba di glycolamine salt 70.8% SL, the 80 1 / ha capacity maintained sufficient tank-mix compatibility for field application. For the 40, 20 and 10 1 / ha capacities, it did not maintain sufficient tank-mix compatibility, so field application at these capacities was not feasible.

[0355] When not mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL, all the products showed sufficient compatibility in water at all capacities.

[0356] Example 11

[0357] Objective: To evaluate the stability of the application solutions with different types of formulation of florasulam in conventional field mixtures using different application rates.

[0358] Material and Methods:

[0359] The test was carried out at the Chimagro S.A. laboratory in the Florencio Varela town of the Bs As province. It was registered in the SENASA laboratory network under number 00043.

[0360] Three different florasulam microemulsion compositions (FORS-1703, FORS-1707 and FORS-1709) were evaluated. They were compared with the standard formulation florasulam sodium salt 26.2% SL (acid equivalent 25% w / v). They were tested as single products in solution and in combination with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL (acid equivalent 54% w / v).

[0361] Then, different mixtures were tested at different application rates (80, 40, 20 and 10 1 / ha) with the aim of simulating the best application conditions as ultra-low water capacity situations corresponding to ground and aerial application.

[0362] The doses chosen for the test were selected taking into account the label doses.

[0363] The following table, column 5, shows the amount of product needed to simulate the different application solutions:

[0364]

[0365]

[0366] The following table, column 5, shows the amount of product needed to simulate the different application solutions:

[0367] For the compatibility test, 100 ml glass test tubes with IVA brand sealed caps were used, with a precision of + 0.5 ml. For the preparation of the mixtures, 50 ml of water were first placed, then the amount needed for each application rate of fluroxypyr, then glyphosate for the treatment (as appropriate), and finally water to complete the final volume. Once the solution was completed, the container was closed and inverted 10 times, turning it 180°.

[0368] After 10 inversions, the test tubes were left to stand and were observed for any precipitate or supernatant at 30 seconds, 30 minutes and 2 hours, respectively.

[0369] In the case of solutions that formed a precipitate, meniscus or foam, their height was measured.

[0370] The results are shown in the following table:

[0371]

[0372]

[0373]

[0374]

[0375] The following table, column 5, shows the amount of product needed to simulate the different application solutions:

[0376] CONCLUSIONS:

[0377] In all cases, the FORS-1703, FORS-1707 and FORS-1709 products maintained adequate tank-mix compatibility for field application at all application rates when mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL.

[0378] For the product halosafen sodium salt 26.2% SL at the 80 l / ha rate, it maintained adequate tank-mix compatibility for field application. For the 40, 20 and 10 l / ha rates, it did not maintain adequate tank-mix compatibility, so field application at these rates was not feasible.

[0379] When not mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL, all products showed adequate compatibility in water at all rates.

[0380] Example 12

[0381] Objective: To evaluate the stability of application solutions with different types of lactofen formulations in conventional field mixtures using different application rates.

[0382] Materials and methods:

[0383] The test was carried out at the Chimagro S.A. laboratory in the Florencio Varela town of Bs As province. It was registered in the SENASA laboratory network under number 00043.

[0384] Three different lactofen microemulsion compositions (LARS-2102, LARS-2105 and LARS-2109) were evaluated. They were compared with the standard formulation lactofen 24% EC. They were tested as single products in solution and in combination with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL (acid equivalent 54% w / v).

[0385] In turn, different mixtures were tested at different application rates (80, 40, 20 and 10 l / ha) in order to simulate the best application conditions as ultra-low water volume situations corresponding to ground and aerial application.

[0386] The doses chosen for the test were selected taking into account the label doses.

[0387] The table below, column 5, shows the amount of product required to simulate the different application solutions:

[0388]

[0389]

[0390] Columns of the above table: test identification number, product tested, field dose used, water quantity applied to the field, formulation product quantity applied in 100 ml test tube.

[0391] For the compatibility test, 100 ml glass test tubes with IVA brand sealed caps were used, with a precision of + 0.5 ml. For the preparation of the mixtures, 50 ml of water were first placed, then the quantity required for each application of the Lassy®lactofen, then the glyphosate for the treatment (as appropriate), and finally water to complete the final volume. After completion of the solution, the container was closed and inverted 10 times, turning it 180°.

[0392] After 10 inversions, the test tubes were left to stand and were observed for any precipitate or supernatant at 30 seconds, 30 minutes and 2 hours, respectively.

[0393] Subsequently, in the case of solutions in which a precipitate, meniscus or foam was formed, their height was measured.

[0394]

[0395]

[0396] Columns of the above table: test identification number, product tested, field dose used, water quantity applied to the field, observation at 30 seconds, 30 minutes and 2 hours.

[0397] CONCLUSIONS:

[0398] In all cases, the LARS-2102, LARS-2105 and LARS-2109 products, when mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL, maintained sufficient tank-mix compatibility for field application at all application rates.

[0399] The product Lassy®lactofen 24% EC maintained sufficient tank-mix compatibility for field application for the 80 l / ha capacity. For the 40, 20 and 10 l / ha capacities, it did not maintain sufficient tank-mix compatibility, so field application at these capacities is not feasible.

[0400] When not mixed with glyphosate potassium salt 66.2% SL, all the products showed sufficient compatibility in water at all capacities.

[0401] Example 13

[0402] In order to demonstrate the improved stability of the formulations of the present application, the stability of the subject formulations of the present application was studied at high and low temperatures, in accordance with the CIPAC guidelines, comparing them with conventional commercial products commonly used on the market. The results obtained show that the formulations proposed in the present application are beneficial, since the proposed objective is in fact achieved.

[0403] High and low temperature stability test for formulation products

[0404] 1. Purpose

[0405] The purpose of the test is to determine the robustness of the formulation in terms of stability under high and low temperature conditions. Also, the values obtained are used to understand the performance of the formulation after the longest two years of storage. This is relevant when understanding that formulations which are sensitive to high temperatures cannot be proven stable within the required shelf life of 2 years for commercial products.

[0406] 2. General method

[0407] 2.1 High temperature stability (CIPAC MT 46.3)

[0408] A mass of product is weighed and the pH and active concentration are determined. It is then stored in a caramel glass jar in an oven at 54°C (± 2°C) for 14 days. After this period, the sample is removed from the oven and left until it reaches room temperature. 24 hours before, the active ingredient concentration is determined again.

[0409]

[0410]

[0411] 2.2 Low temperature stability (CIPAC MT 39.3)

[0412] 50 mL (± 1 mL) of the formulation to be evaluated are measured in a volumetric flask, which is then subjected to a temperature of 0°C (± 2°C). After one hour under the operating conditions, the occurrence of liquid or solid separation is observed. Subsequently, the sample is kept under these conditions for 7 days, after which the occurrence of phase separation is observed.

[0413] In the case of samples that become heterogeneous, the volume of each phase is taken.

[0414]

[0415]

[0416]

[0417]

[0418]

[0419]

[0420]

[0421]

[0422]

[0423]

[0424]

[0425]

[0426]

[0427] 3. Results Discussion

[0428] From the analysis carried out, it can be concluded that the formulation studied is stable at high and low temperatures.

Claims

1. A herbicide composition in the form of a microemulsion (ME), wherein The composition comprises: The active ingredient is selected from 2,4-D, dicamba, fomesafen and lactofensulfuron.

2. The composition according to claim 1, wherein The composition comprises: Percentages are expressed as % w / V relative to the total formulation.

3. The composition according to claim 1, wherein The composition comprises: Percentages are expressed as % w / V relative to the total formulation.

4. The composition according to claim 1, wherein The composition comprises: Percentages are expressed as % w / V relative to the total formulation.

5. The composition according to claim 1, wherein The composition comprises: Percentages are expressed as % w / V relative to the total formulation.

6. A method for preparing a composition according to any one of the preceding claims, wherein: The method comprises the following steps: - a theoretical amount of coconut fatty amine ethoxylate with 15 moles of ethylene oxide was charged into a stirred tank, - Add all the required ethanol while stirring until homogeneity is achieved, - Add half of the required water while stirring until homogeneity is achieved, - charging the entire required amount of dimethylaminopropionamides of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids with stirring and stirring until complete dissolution is achieved and a crystalline solution is obtained, - adding all the required amount of the active ingredient selected from 2,4-D, dicamba, fomesafen or lactofensulfuron under stirring and stirring until complete dissolution is achieved and a crystalline solution is obtained, - add the remaining required water in the recipe under stirring until homogeneity and final volume are reached, and - Filter the thus homogenized solution.

7. A tank mix comprising the composition of any one of claims 1 to 5 and comprising glyphosate, picloram, atrazine, sulfentrazone, clofosyl sulfamethoxam, mepiquat, paraquat, imazapic, imazapic, imazethapyr, or a mixture thereof as a supplementary pesticide ingredient.

8. The tank mix of claim 7, wherein: The tank mix contains 2,4-D and glyphosate as active ingredients.

9. The tank mix of claim 8, wherein Glyphosate is in the form of a potassium salt.

10. The tank mix according to claim 7, wherein The tank mix contains dicamba and glyphosate as active ingredients.

11. The tank mix of claim 10, wherein Glyphosate is in the form of a potassium salt.

12. The tank mix of claim 7, wherein: The tank mix contains fomesafen and glyphosate as active ingredients.

13. The tank mix of claim 12, wherein: Glyphosate is in the form of a potassium salt.

14. The tank mix of claim 7, wherein: The tank mix contains lactofenzeb and glyphosate as active ingredients.

15. The tank mix of claim 14, wherein Glyphosate is in the form of a potassium salt.

Images