Herbicidal Composition Synergy Against Resistance
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current herbicidal compositions for controlling undesirable vegetation in agriculture often rely on glufosinate, L-glufosinate, or bialaphos, which may not be effective across all crop types and can lead to herbicide resistance, necessitating the development of alternative compositions that do not include these components.
Innovation Solution
The use of a herbicidal composition comprising a compound of the formula 4-amino-3-chloro-6-(4-chloro-2-fluoro-3-methoxyphenyl)-pyridine-2-carboxylic acid or its agriculturally acceptable salt or ester, combined with flurtamone and optionally diflufenican or flufenacet, without glufosinate, L-glufosinate, or bialaphos, to effectively control weeds in various crops and non-crop settings.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If glufosinate, L-glufosinate, or bialaphos is used in herbicidal compositions, then weed control effectiveness is achieved, but herbicide resistance develops and crop management flexibility is reduced
Solution Approach 1:
The patent divides the herbicidal system into multiple independent active ingredients (compound of formula I, flurtamone, and optionally diflufenican or flufenacet), each targeting different weed resistance mechanisms. This segmentation allows the composition to maintain effectiveness against herbicide-resistant weeds while avoiding reliance on a single chemical class like glufosinate or bialaphos that promotes resistance.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent creates a universal herbicidal composition that can be applied across multiple crop types and weed species without requiring glufosinate or bialaphos. The combination of compound of formula I with flurtamone provides broad-spectrum weed control suitable for various agricultural settings, enhancing crop management flexibility while maintaining reliability.
2Reliability
If glufosinate, L-glufosinate, or bialaphos is used in herbicidal compositions, then weed control is achieved, but the composition becomes less effective across different crop types
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies local quality by selecting herbicidal components (compound of formula I, flurtamone, diflufenican, flufenacet) that have specific modes of action effective against particular weed types and crop combinations. This allows the composition to maintain high effectiveness across different crop types by matching the herbicidal mechanism to the specific agricultural context rather than using a universal but less effective glufosinate-based system.
3Object-generated harmful factors
If alternative herbicidal compositions without glufosinate or bialaphos are developed, then herbicide resistance is reduced, but composition complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent merges multiple herbicidal active ingredients (compound of formula I, flurtamone, and optionally diflufenican or flufenacet) into a single composition system. This combining approach reduces herbicide resistance by utilizing different modes of action while managing composition complexity through a structured formulation that integrates multiple components with complementary mechanisms rather than simply listing separate chemicals.
Data Source
AI summary
Provided herein are herbicidal compositions and methods employing combinations of (a) a compound of formula (I): or an agriculturally acceptable salt or ester thereof and (b) flurtamone. In certain embodiments the combinations include flufenacet or diflufenican as a third herbicidally active component.