Examples of exogenous chemical substances include, but are not limited to, chemical pesticides (such as herbicides, algicides. fungicides. bactericides, viricides, insecticides, aphicides, miticides, nematicides, molluscicides, and the like), plant growth regulators, fertilizers and nutrients, gametocides, defoliants, desiccants, mixtures thereof, and the like.

Exogenous chemicals, including foliar-applied herbicides, have at times been formulated with surfactants, so that when water is added, the resulting sprayable composition is more easily and effectively retained on the foliage (e.g., the leaves or other photosynthesizing organs) of plants.

Surfactants can also bring other benefits, including improved contact of spray droplets with a waxy leaf surface and, in some cases, improved penetration of the accompanying exogenous chemical into the interior of leaves. Through these and perhaps other effects, surfactants have long been known to increase the biological effectiveness of herbicide compositions, or other compositions of exogenous chemicals, when added to or included in such compositions. Thus, for example, the herbicide glyphosate (N- phosphonomethylglycine) has been formulated with surfactants such as polyoxyalkylene-type surfactants including, among other surfactants, polyoxyalkylene alkylamines. Commercial formulations of glyphosate herbicide marketed under the trademark ROUNDUP have been formulated with a surfactant composition based on such a polyoxyalkylene alkylamine, in particular a polyethoxylated tallowamine, this surfactant composition being identified as MON 0818. Surfactants have generally been combined with glyphosate or other exogenous chemicals either in a commercial concentrate (herein referred to as a "coformulation"), or in a diluted mixture that is prepared from separate compositions, one comprising an exogenous chemical (e.g. glyphosate) and another comprising surfactant, prior to use in the field (i.e., a tank mix).

Various combinations of exogenous chemicals and surfactants or other adjuvants have been tested in the past. In some instances, the addition of a particular surfactant has not produced uniformly positive or negative changes in the effect of the exogenous chemical on the plant (e.g., a surfactant that may enhance the activity of a particular herbicide on certain weeds may interfere with, or antagonize, the

herbicidal efficacy on another weed species).

Some surfactants tend to degrade fairly rapidly in aqueous solutions. As a result, surfactants that exhibit this property can only be used effectively in tank mixes (i.e., mixed with the other ingredients in solution or dispersion in the tank soon before spraying is to occur), rather than being coformulated in an aqueous composition with the other ingredients in the first instance. This lack of stability, or inadequate shelf-life, has hindered the use of certain surfactants in some exogenous chemical formulations.

Other surfactants, though chemically stable, are physically incompatible with certain exogenous chemicals, particularly in concentrate coformulations. For example, most classes of nonionic surfactant, including polyoxyethylene alkylether surfactants, do not tolerate solutions of high ionic strength, as for example in a concentrated aqueous solution of a salt of glyphosate. Physical incompatibility can also lead to inadequate shelf-life. Other problems that can arise from such incompatibility include the formation of aggregates large enough to interfere with commercial handling and application, for example by blocking spray nozzles.

Another problem that has been observed in the past is the effect of environmental conditions on uptake of an exogenous chemical composition into foliage of a plant. For example, conditions such as temperature, relative humidity, presence or absence of sunlight, and health of the plant to be treated, can affect the uptake of a herbicide into the plant. As a result, spraying exactly the same herbicidal composition in two different situations can result in different herbicidal control of the sprayed plants.

One consequence of the above-described variability is that often a higher rate of herbicide per unit area is applied than might actually be required in that situation, in order to be certain that adequate control of undesired plants will be achieved. For similar reasons, other foliar-applied exogenous chemicals are also typically applied at significantly higher rates than needed to give the desired biological effect in the particular situation where they are used to allow for the natural variability that exists in efficiency of foliar uptake. A need therefore exists for compositions of exogenous chemicals that, through more efficient uptake into plant foliage, allow reduced use rates.

Many exogenous chemicals are commercially packaged as a liquid concentrate that contains a significant amount of water. The packaged concentrate is shipped to distributors or retailers. Ultimately the packaged concentrate ends up in the hands of an end user, who further dilutes the concentrate by adding water in accordance with label instructions on the package. The dilute composition thus prepared is then sprayed on plants.

A significant portion of the cost of such packaged concentrates is the cost of transporting the concentrate from the manufacturing site to the location where the end user purchases it. Any liquid concentrate formulation that contained relatively less water and thus more exogenous chemical would reduce the cost per unit amount of exogenous chemical. However, one important limit on the ability of the manufacturer to increase the loading of the exogenous chemical in the concentrate is the stability of that formulation. With some combinations of ingredients, a limit will be reached at which any further

reduction of water content in the concentrate will cause it to become unstable (e.g., to separate into discrete layers), which may make it commercially unacceptable.

Accordingly, a need exists for improved formulations of exogenous chemicals, particularly herbicides, that are stable, effective, less sensitive to environmental conditions, and permit the use of reduced amounts of exogenous chemical to achieve the desired biological effect in or on plants. A need also exists for stable liquid concentrate formulations of exogenous chemicals that contain less water and more exogenous chemical than prior art concentrates.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION The present invention relates to novel methods and compositions wherein exogenous chemicals are applied to plants to generate a desired biological response.

One embodiment of the present invention is a plant treatment composition that comprises (a) a water-soluble exogenous chemical and (b) an adjuvant amount of a solid inorganic particulate colloidal material. By "adjuvant amount" is meant an amount sufficient to provide visibly improved biological effectiveness of the exogenous chemical by comparison with an otherwise similar composition lacking the colloidal material. Optimum concentrations in a sprayable aqueous composition depend on the exogenous chemical, the biological effect desired and the plant species to which the composition is to be applied, and can readily be determined for any particular situation by routine testing. In most situations the optimum concentration of colloidal particulate will be found in the range from about 0.001% to about 0.5% by weight, more particularly from about 0.01% to about 0.5% by weight, of the sprayable composition.

In this embodiment of the invention, the colloidal particulate substitutes in whole or in part for surfactant in enhancing the biological effectiveness of the exogenous chemical. Accordingly a composition of this embodiment of the invention contains no surfactant, or if a surfactant is present the maximum amount S of surfactant is one-tenth of the amount of exogenous chemical in the composition.

In compositions having amounts of surfactant greater than S above, colloidal particulates can in some circumstances still provide enhancement of biological effectiveness but such enhancement is likely to be modest in comparison with that provided by the surfactant. In such compositions, a greater benefit of colloidal particulates is that they enable aqueous concentrate formulations to be prepared at high concentrations of exogenous chemical and/or surfactant without the common attendant problem of phase separation. This is especially true where the surfactant is nonionic.

Accordingly, another embodiment of the present invention is an aqueous concentrate plant treatment composition that comprises (a) a water-soluble exogenous chemical, (b) an aqueous diluent, (c) a surfactant component comprising one or more nonionic surfactant(s), and (d) an amount of a solid inorganic particulate colloidal material effective to stabilize the composition, said composition not exhibiting phase separation over a period of time T as defined below when stored in a closed container at a temperature in the range from about 1 50C to about 30"C; wherein the exogenous chemical and the

surfactant are present at concentrations in the absolute or relative to each other such that. in the absence of the colloidal material, phase separation would occur during said period of time T.

The period of time T over which a composition can be observed to determine if phase separation occurs is in the range from about 1 hour to about 60 days. * Phase separation" in the present context means separation of at least part of the surfactant component from other ingredients of the composition as a distinct phase. The particulate colloidal material preferably is present in the aqueous concentrate in an amount between about 0.01% and about 5% by weight, more preferably between about 0.5% and about 2.5% by weight, of the composition. By "aqueous concentrate" is meant a composition comprising water and from about 10% to about 60% by weight of the exogenous chemical.

Preferred solid inorganic particulates include silicon oxides, aluminum oxides, titanium oxides, and mixtures thereof. In one preferred embodiment, the particulate colloidal material has an average specific surface area of about 50 to about 400 m2/g. In another embodiment, the particulate colloidal material has an average specific surface area of about 180 to about 400 m2/g. In yet another embodiment, the particulate colloidal material has a bimodal distribution of specific surface area whereby a first component of the colloidal material has an average specific surface area of about 50 to about 150 m2/g and a second component of the colloidal material has an average specific surface area of about 180 to about 400 m2/g.

The nonionic surfactant component of the composition, where present, preferably comprises one or more alkylether surfactants having the formula R12-O-(CH2CH2O)n(CH(CH3)CH2O)m-R13 VI wherein R12 is an alkyl or alkenyl group having about 16 to about 22 carbon atoms, n is an average number of about 10 to about 100, mis an average number ofO to about 5 and Rl3 is hydrogen or C4 alkyl. The term "alkylether" as used herein should be understood to include alkenylether surfactants.

More preferably Rl2 is a saturated straight-chain alkyl group, Rl3 is hydrogen, m is 0 and n is from about 10 to about 40, most preferably from about 20 to about 40. Most preferably the alkylether surfactant is a polyoxyethylene cetyl or stearyl ether or mixture thereof having 20-40 moles of ethylene oxide (EO).

A wide variety of water-soluble exogenous chemicals can be used in the compositions and methods of the present invention. By "water-soluble" in this context is meant having a solubility in distilled water at 250C greater than about 1% by weight. A preferred class is foliar-applied water-soluble exogenous chemicals, i.e. exogenous chemicals that are normally applied post-emergence to foliage of plants. Especially preferred foliar-applied water-soluble exogenous chemicals are salts that have an anion portion and a cation portion. In one embodiment of the invention, at least one of the anion and cation portions is biologically active and has a molecular weight of less than about 300. Particular examples of such exogenous chemicals where the cation portion is biologically active are paraquat, diquat and chlormequat. More commonly it is the anion portion that is biologically active.

Another preferred subclass of exogenous chemicals is those that exhibit systemic biological

activity in the plant. Within this subclass, an especially preferred group of exogenous chemicals is N- phosphonomethylglycine and its herbicidal derivatives. N-phosphonomethylglycine, often referred to by its common name glyphosate, can be used in its acid form, but is more preferably used in the form of a salt. Any water-soluble salt of glyphosate can be used in the practice of this invention. Some preferred salts include the sodium, potassium, ammonium, mono-, di-, tri- and tetra-C1.4-alkylammonium, mono-, di- and tri-C14-alkanolammonium, mono-, di- and tri-C1.4-alkylsulfonium and sulfoxonium salts. The ammonium, monoisopropylammonium and trimethylsulfonium salts of glyphosate are especially preferred. Mixtures of salts can also be useful in certain situations.

A composition of the present invention can have a number of different physical forms. For example, a composition comprising an exogenous chemical and colloidal particulate can further comprise water in an amount effective to make the composition a dilute aqueous composition ready for application to foliage of a plant, i.e. a sprayable composition or "spray composition". Such a composition typically contains about 0.02 to about 2% by weight of the exogenous chemical, but for some purposes can contain up to about 10% by weight or even more of the exogenous chemical.

The composition can alternatively comprise a lesser amount of water such that the composition is an aqueous concentrate as defined above, suitable for dilution in water to form a sprayable composition. At the extreme the concentration contains 5% by weight or less, preferably 0.5% or less by weight, of water and is a solid composition comprising the exogenous chemical in an amount of about 10% to about 90% by weight. Such a solid composition can be, for example, a water-dispersible dry granular formulation. Preferably, water-dispersible granular formulations of the invention contain about 0.01% to about 10% by weight of colloidal particulate.

Where the composition is an aqueous concentrate comprising a non ionic surfactant component, it is especially preferred for the exogenous chemical substance to be present in an aqueous phase of the composition in an amount of about 15 to about 45 percent by weight of the composition. in particular, such a composition can be, for example, an aqueous solution concentrate or an emulsion having an oil phase, in either case with the colloidal particulate suspended in the composition. If the composition is an emulsion, or more correctly a suspo-emulsion because of the presence of the colloidal particulate in suspension, it can more specifically be, for example, an oil-in-water emulsion, a water-in-oil emulsion, or a water-in-oil-in-water multiple emulsion.

In one embodiment of the invention, the composition further comprises a compound or mixture of compounds having the formula R14-CO-A-R15 VII wherein Rl4 is a hydrocarbyl group having about 5 to about 21 carbon atoms, R'5 is a hydrocarbyl group having 1 to about 14 carbon atoms, the total number of carbon atoms in Rl4 and Rl5 is about 11 to about 27, and A is O or NH. The compound of formula VII is preferably present at a concentration of about 0.1% to about 5% by weight.

In one preferred embodiment, the weight/weight ratio of the compound of formula VII to the exogenous chemical is from about 1:3 to about 1:100. It is particularly preferred that the weight/weight ratio of nonionic surfactant to the exogenous chemical is also from about 1:3 to about 1:100. In another embodiment, Rl4 is saturated in from about 40 to 100 percent by weight of all compounds having the stated formula present in the composition. Rl4 preferably has about 11 to about 21 carbon atoms, Rl5 preferably has 1 to about 6 carbon atoms and A is preferably 0.

In certain preferred embodiments of the present invention, the compound of formula VII is a CIA alkyl ester of a C12-18 fatty acid, more preferably a C, 4 alkyl ester of a C12-18 saturated fatty acid. Propyl, isopropyl or butyl esters oft12.18 fatty acids, such as butyl stearate, are especially preferred.

The compositions and methods of the present invention have a number of advantages. Those containing an alkylether surfactant of the formula shown above provide enhanced biological activity of exogenous chemicals in or on plants in comparison with prior formulations, either in terms of greater ultimate biological effect, or obtaining an equivalent biological effect while using a reduced application rate of exogenous chemical. In the absence of a surfactant component, compositions of the invention provide useful biological effect at remarkably low cost. Certain herbicide formulations of the present invention can avoid antagonism that has been observed in some prior art herbicide formulations, and can minimize quick production of necrotic lesions on leaves that in some situations hinder overall translocation of herbicide in the plant. Certain herbicide compositions of the invention modify the spectrum of activity of the herbicide across a range of plant species. For example, certain formulations of the present invention containing glyphosate can provide good herbicidal activity against broadleaf weeds while not losing any herbicidal effectiveness on narrowleaf weeds. Others can enhance herbicidal effectiveness on narrowleaf weeds to a greater extent than on broadleaf weeds. Still others can have enhanced effectiveness which is specific to a narrow range of species or even a single species.

Another advantage of the present invention is that it employs relatively small amounts of the colloidal particulate and nonionic surfactant (if present) in relation to the amount of exogenous chemical employed. This makes the compositions and methods of the present invention relatively inexpensive, and also tends to reduce instability problems in specific compositions where the surfactant is physically incompatible with the exogenous chemical (e.g., alkylether surfactants in solutions of high ionic strength, such as concentrated glyphosate salt solutions). It is preferred that the weight/weight ratio of surfactant to exogenous chemical be in the range from about 1:3 to about 1:100.

Even at such low concentrations of surfactant, there may be limits on the maximum concentration of exogenous chemical that can be used without causing compatibility problems (e.g., separation of the composition into discrete layers). In the present invention, composition stability at high loadings of exogenous chemical is maintained by adding colloidal particulates. Some compositions of the present invention exhibit enhanced biological activity and have a higher loading of exogenous chemical than is possible in prior art compositions.

Further, compositions of the present invention are less sensitive in some instances to environmental conditions such as relative humidity at the time of application to the plant. Also, the present invention allows the use of smaller amounts of herbicides or other pesticides, while still obtaining the required degree of control of weeds or other undesired organisms.

DESCRIPTION OF ILLUSTRATIVE EMBODIMENTS Examples of water-soluble exogenous chemical substances that can be included in compositions of the present invention include, but are not limited to, chemical pesticides (such as herbicides, algicides, fungicides, bactericides, viricides, insecticides, aphicides, miticides, nematicides, molluscicides and the like), plant growth regulators, fertilizers and nutrients, gametocides, defoliants. desiccants, mixtures thereof and the like.

A preferred group of exogenous chemicals are those that are normally applied post-emergence to the foliage of plants, i.e. foliar-applied exogenous chemicals.

Exogenous chemicals useful in the present invention are water-soluble. for example salts that comprise biologically active ions, and also comprise counterions, which may be biologically inert or relatively inactive. By "water-soluble" herein is meant having a solubility in water sufficiently high that when formulated as a sprayable aqueous composition at a concentration of about 0.01% to about 1% by weight, substantially all the exogenous chemical present is in aqueous solution.

A particularly preferred group of these water-soluble exogenous chemicals or their biologically active ions or moieties are systemic in plants, that is, they are to some extent translocated from the point of entry in the foliage to other parts of the plant where they can exert their desired biological effect.

Especially preferred among these are herbicides, plant growth regulators and nematicides, particularly those that have a molecular weight, excluding counterions, of less than about 300. More especially preferred among these are exogenous chemical compounds having one or more functional groups selected from amine, carboxylate, phosphonate and phosphinate groups.

Among such compounds, an even more preferred group are herbicidal or plant growth regulating exogenous chemical compounds having at least one of each of amine, carboxylate, and either phosphonate or phosphinate functional groups. Salts of N-phosphonomethylglycine are examples of this group of exogenous chemicals. Further examples include salts of glufosinate, for instance the ammonium salt (ammonium DL-homoalanin-4-yl (methyl) phosphinate).

Another preferred group of exogenous chemicals which can be applied by the method of the invention are nematicides such as those disclosed in U.S. Patent No. 5,389,680, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference. Preferred nematicides of this group are salts of 3,4,4-trifluoro-3- butenoic acid or of N-(3,4,4-trifluoro- 1 -oxo-3-butenyl)glycine.

Exogenous chemicals which can usefully be applied by the method of the present invention are normally, but not exclusively, those which are expected to have a beneficial effect on the overall growth or yield of desired plants such as crops, or a deleterious or lethal effect on the growth of undesirable

plants such as weeds. The method of the present invention is particularly useful for herbicides, especially those that are normally applied post-emergence to the foliage of unwanted vegetation.

Water-soluble herbicides which can be applied by the method of the present invention include but are not limited to any listed in standard reference works such as the "Herbicide Handbook," Weed Science Societv of America, 1994, 7th Edition, or the "Farm Chemicals Handbook," Meister Publishing Company, 1997 Edition. Illustratively these herbicides include aminotriazole. asulam, bentazon, bialaphos, bipyridyls such as paraquat, dicamba, diphenylethers such as acifluorfen, fatty acids such as C910 fatty acids, fosamine, glufosinate, glyphosate, imidazolinones such as imazaquin and imazethapyr, phenoxies such as 2,4-D, picloram, and triclopyr. Herbicidally active derivatives of any known herbicide are also within the scope of the present invention if such derivatives are water-soluble. A herbicidally active derivative is any compound which is a minor structural modification, most commonly but not restrictively a salt, of a known herbicide. These compounds retain the essential activity of the parent herbicide, but may not necessarily have a potency equal to that of the parent herbicide. These compounds may convert to the parent herbicide before or after they enter the treated plant. Mixtures or coformulations of a water-soluble herbicide with other ingredients, including other herbicides which can be water-soluble or not, may likewise be employed.

An especially preferred herbicide is N-phosphonomethylglycine (glyphosate), a salt, adduct or ester thereof, or a compound which is converted to glyphosate in plant tissues or which otherwise provides glyphosate ion. Glyphosate salts that can be used according to this invention include but are not restricted to alkali metal, for example sodium and potassium, salts; ammonium salt; alkylamine, for example dimethylamine and isopropylamine, salts; alkanolamine, for example ethanolamine, salts; alkylsulfonium, for example trimethylsulfonium, salts; sulfoxonium salts; and mixtures thereof. The herbicidal compositions sold by Monsanto Company as ROUNDUPB and ACCORD contain the monoisopropylamine (IPA) salt of N-phosphonomethylglycine. The herbicidal compositions sold by Monsanto Company as ROUNDUP(l Dry and RIVALS contain the monoammonium salt of N-phosphonomethylglycine. The herbicidal composition sold by Monsanto Company as ROUNDUP Geoforce contains the monosodium salt of N-phosphonomethylglycine. The herbicidal composition sold by Zeneca as TOUCHDOWNX contains the trimethylsulfonium salt of N-phosphonomethylglycine. The herbicidal properties of N-phosphonomethylglycine and its derivatives were first discovered by Franz, then disclosed and patented in U.S. Patent 3,799,758, issued March 26, 1974. A number of herbicidal salts of N-phosphonomethylglycine were patented by Franz in U.S. Patent 4,405,531, issued September 20, 1983. The disclosures of both of these patents are hereby incorporated by reference.

Because the commercially most important herbicidal derivatives of N-phosphonomethylglycine are certain salts thereof, the glyphosate compositions useful in the present invention will be described in more detail with respect to such salts. These salts are well known and include ammonium, IPA, alkali metal (such as the mono-, di-, and trisodium salts, and the mono-, di-, and tripotassium salts), and

trimethylsulfonium salts. Salts of N-phosphonomethylglycine are commercially significant in part because they are water soluble. The salts listed immediately above are highly water soluble, thereby allowing for highly concentrated solutions that can be diluted at the site of use. In accordance with the method of this invention as it pertains to glyphosate herbicide, an aqueous solution containing a herbicidally effective amount of glyphosate and other components in accordance with the invention is applied to foliage of plants. Such an aqueous solution can be obtained by dilution of a concentrated glyphosate salt solution with water, or dissolution or dispersion in water of a dry (e.g. granular, powder, tablet or briquette) glyphosate formulation.

Exogenous chemicals should be applied to plants at a rate sufficient to give the desired biological effect. These application rates are usually expressed as amount of exogenous chemical per unit area treated, e.g. grams per hectare (g/ha). What constitutes a "desired effect" varies according to the standards and practice of those who investigate, develop, market and use a specific class of exogenous chemicals. For example, in the case of a herbicide, the amount applied per unit area to give 85% control of a plant species as measured by growth reduction or mortality is often used to define a commercially effective rate.

Herbicidal effectiveness is one of the biological effects that can be enhanced through this invention. "Herbicidal effectiveness," as used herein, refers to any observable measure of control of plant growth, which can include one or more of the actions of(l) killing, (2) inhibiting growth, reproduction or proliferation, and (3) removing, destroying, or otherwise diminishing the occurrence and activity of plants.

The herbicidal effectiveness data set forth herein report "inhibition" as a percentage following a standard procedure in the art which reflects a visual assessment of plant mortality and growth reduction by comparison with untreated plants, made by technicians specially trained to make and record such observations. In all cases, a single technician makes all assessments of percent inhibition within any one experiment or trial. Such measurements are relied upon and regularly reported by Monsanto Company in the course of its herbicide business.

The selection of application rates that are biologically effective for a specific exogenous chemical is within the skill of the ordinary agricultural scientist. Those of skill in the art will likewise recognize that individual plant conditions, weather and growing conditions, as well as the specific exogenous chemical and formulation thereof selected, will affect the efficacy achieved in practicing this invention. Useful application rates for exogenous chemicals employed can depend upon all of the above conditions. With respect to the use of the method of this invention for glyphosate herbicide, much information is known about appropriate application rates. Over two decades of glyphosate use and published studies relating to such use have provided abundant information from which a weed control practitioner can select glyphosate application rates that are herbicidally effective on particular species at particular growth stages in particular environmental conditions.

Herbicidal compositions of glyphosate or derivatives thereof are used to control a very wide variety of plants worldwide. Such compositions can be applied to a plant in a herbicidally effective amount, and can effectively control one or more plant species of one or more of the following genera without restriction: Abutilon, Amaranthus, Artemisia, Asclepias, Avena, Axonopus, Borreria, Brachiaria, Brassica, Bromus, Chenopodium, Cirsium, Commel ina, Convolvulus, Cynodon, Cyperus, Digitaria, Echinochloa, Eleusine, Elymus, Equisetum, Erodium, Helianthus, Imperata, Ipomoea, Kochia, Lolium, Malva, Oryza, Ottochloa, Panicum, Paspalum, Phalaris, Phragmites, Polygonum, Portulaca, Pteridium, Pueraria, Rubus, Salsola, Setaria, Sida, Sinapis, Sorghum, Triticum, Typha, Ulex, Xanthium, and Zea.

Particularly important species for which glyphosate compositions are used are exemplified without limitation by the following: Annual broad leaves: velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) pigweed (Amaranthus spp.) buttonweed (Borreria spp.) oilseed rape, canola, indian mustard, etc. (Brassica spp.) commelina (Commelina spp.) filaree (Erodium spp.) sunflower (Helianthus spp.) momingglory (Ipomoea spp.) kochia (Kochia scoparia) mallow (Malva spp.) wild buckwheat, smartweed, etc. (Polygonum spp.) purslane (Portulaca spp.) russian thistle (Salsola spp.) sida (Sida spp.) wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis) cocklebur (Xanthium spp.) Annual narrowleaves: wild oat (Avena fatua) carpetgrass (Axonopus spp.) downy brome (Bromus tectorum) crabgrass (Digitaria spp.) barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) goosegrass (Eleusine indica) annual ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum)

rice (Oryza sativa) ottochloa (Ottochloa nodosa) bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum) canarygrass (Phalaris spp.) foxtail (Setaria spp.) wheat (Triticum aestivum) corn (Zea mays) Perennial broad leaves: mugwort (Artemisia spp.) milkweed (Asclepias spp.) canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) kudzu (Pueraria spp.) Perennial narrowleaves: brachiaria (Brachiaria spp.) bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) purple nutsedge (C. rotundus) quackgrass (Elymus repens) lalang (Imperata cylindrica) perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) guineagrass (Panicum maximum) dallisgrass (Paspalum dilatatum) reed (Phragmites spp.) johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) cattail (Typha spp.) Other perennials: horsetail (Equisetum spp.) bracken (Pteridium aquilinum) blackberry (Rubus spp.) gorse (Ulex europaeus)

Thus, the method of the present invention, as it pertains to glyphosate herbicide, can be useful on any of the above species.

Effectiveness in greenhouse tests, usually at exogenous chemical rates lower than those normally effective in the field, is a proven indicator of consistency of field performance at normal use rates.

However, even the most promising composition sometimes fails to exhibit enhanced performance in individual greenhouse tests. As illustrated in the Examples herein, a pattern of enhancement emerges over a series of greenhouse tests; when such a pattern is identified this is strong evidence of biological enhancement that will be useful in the field.

Aqueous concentrate compositions in some circumstances are limited in the degree to which an exogenous chemical such as glyphosate can be loaded. At some point, as the loading of exogenous chemical is increased, the composition will not remain suitably stable. Addition of a small amount of colloidal particulate to such compositions has surprisingly been found to greatly increase loading ability while retaining desired stability. Inclusion of such colloidal particulates can also enhance biological activity of an exogenous chemical formulation, particularly in the absence of surfactant. Oxides of silicon, aluminum and titanium are preferred colloidal particulate materials. Particle size is preferably such that specific surface area is in the range from about 50 to about 400 m2/g. Where the exogenous chemical is glyphosate, the use of colloidal particulate enables loadings of at least 30% by weight for compositions containing sufficient alkylether surfactant and fatty acid ester such as butyl stearate to show enhanced herbicidal effectiveness, or at least 40% by weight for compositions containing alkylether surfactant but no fatty acid ester, and showing herbicidal effectiveness at least equal to current commercial products loaded at about 30% by weight. We have found especially useful improvement in storage stability can be obtained using colloidal particulates having specific surface area between about 180 and about 400 m2/g.

Compositions of the present invention can optionally include a long-chain alkylether surfactant having the formula VI above. Rl2 can be branched or unbranched, saturated or unsaturated. Rl2 is preferably straight-chain saturated C16 alkyl (cetyl) or straight-chain saturated C18 alkyl (stearyl). In preferred alkylethers m is 0, n is an average number from about 20 to about 40 and R13 is preferably hydrogen. Among especially preferred alkylether surfactants are those identified in the International Cosmetic Ingredient Directory as ceteth-20, ceteareth-20, ceteareth-27, steareth-20 and steareth-30.

Compositions of the present invention can optionally further include amides or esters of formula VII above.

Rl4 in formula VII is preferably aliphatic and has about 7 to about 21 carbon atoms, more preferably about 13 to about 21 carbon atoms. It is especially preferred that Rl4 be a saturated straight- chain alkyl group. Rl5 is preferably an aliphatic group having 1-6 carbon atoms, more preferably alkyl or alkenyl having 2-4 carbon atoms. An especially preferred compound of formula VII for use as the second excipient substance is butyl stearate.

As compounds of formula VII, including butyl stearate, are generally oily liquids, aqueous compositions containing them are typically emulsions having at least one aqueous phase and at least one oil phase, with the compound of formula VII being present predominantly in the oil phase. Such emulsions may be water-in-oil, oil-in-water or water-in-oil-in-water (W/O/W) multiple emulsions.

Compositions in accordance with the present invention are typically prepared by combining water, the exogenous chemical, the colloidal particulate, the nonionic surfactant if one is to be used, and any other formulation ingredients to be included. Details of a specific process used to prepare such compositions are included in the Examples herein.

The concentrations of the various components will vary, in part depending on whether a concentrate is being prepared that will be further diluted before spraying onto a plant, or whether a solution or dispersion is being prepared that can be sprayed without further dilution.

In an aqueous glyphosate formulation that includes a C16-18 alkylether surfactant and butyl stearate, suitable concentrations can be: glyphosate 0.1 - 400 g a.e./l, alkylether surfactant 0.001 - 10% by weight, and butyl stearate 0.001 - 10% by weight. To achieve the higher concentrations in these ranges, we have found addition of colloidal particulates to provide acceptable storage stability, for example colloidal particulate silica or aluminum oxide at 0.5 - 2.5% by weight. In an aqueous glyphosate formulation that includes a C,618 alkylether surfactant but no butyl stearate, glyphosate concentration can suitably be increased to 500 g a.e./l or more, in the presence of a colloidal particulate at 0.5 - 2.5% by weight.

In solid glyphosate formulations, higher concentrations of ingredients are possible because of the elimination of most of the water.

Although various compositions of the present invention are described herein as comprising certain listed materials, in some preferred embodiments of the invention the compositions consist essentially of the indicated materials.

Optionally, other agriculturally acceptable materials can be included in the compositions. For example, more than one exogenous chemical can be included. Also, various agriculturally acceptable adjuvants can be included, whether or not their purpose is to directly contribute to the effect of the exogenous chemical on a plant. For example, when the exogenous chemical is a herbicide, liquid nitrogen fertilizer or ammonium sulfate might be included in the composition. As another example, stabilizers can be added to the composition. In some instances it might be desirable to include microencapsulated acid in the composition, to lower the pH of a spray solution on contact with a leaf.

One or more surfactants can also be included. Surfactants mentioned here by trade name, and other surfactants that can be useful in the method of the invention, are indexed in standard reference works such as McCutcheon's Emulsifiers and Detergents, 1997 edition, Handbook of Industrial Surfactants, 2nd Edition, 1997, published by Gower, and International Cosmetic Ingredient Dictionary, 6th Edition, 1995.

The compositions of the present invention can be applied to plants by spraying, using any conventional means for spraying liquids, such as spray nozzles, atomizers, or the like. Compositions of the present invention can be used in precision farming techniques, in which apparatus is employed to vary the amount of exogenous chemical applied to different parts of a field, depending on variables such as the particular plant species present, soil composition, and the like. In one embodiment of such techniques, a global positioning system operated with the spraying apparatus can be used to apply the desired amount of the composition to different parts of a field.

The composition at the time of application to plants is preferably dilute enough to be readily sprayed using standard agricultural spray equipment. Preferred application rates for the present invention vary depending upon a number of factors, including the type and concentration of active ingredient and the plant species involved. Useful rates for applying an aqueous composition to a field of foliage can range from about 25 to about 1,000 liters per hectare (I/ha) by spray application. The preferred application rates for aqueous solutions are in the range from about 50 to about 300 I/ha.

Many exogenous chemicals (including glyphosate herbicide) must be taken up by living tissues of the plant and trans located within the plant in order to produce the desired biological (e.g., herbicidal) effect. Thus, it is important that a herbicidal composition not be applied in such a manner as to excessively injure and interrupt the normal functioning of the local tissue of the plant so quickly that translocation is reduced. However, some limited degree of local injury can be insignificant, or even beneficial, in its impact on the biological effectiveness of certain exogenous chemicals.

A large number of compositions of the invention are illustrated in the Examples that follow.

Many concentrate compositions of glyphosate have provided sufficient herbicidal effectiveness in greenhouse tests to warrant field testing on a wide variety of weed species under a variety of application conditions.

Aqueous compositions tested in the field containing colloidal particulates have included: Field Glyphos- % w/w Type of ' Type of Type of Other composition ate Fatty Surf- Coll. Other surfactant colloidal fatty acid ingredients g a.e./l acid actant partic. particulate ester ester F-36 360 1.0 10.0 1.3 steareth-20 Aerosil 380 Bu stearate F-37 360 1.0 10.0 1.3 oleth-20 Aerosil 380 Bu stearate F-38 360 1.0 10.0 1.3 steareth-30 Aerosil 380 Bu stearate F-39 360 ~ 10.0 1.3 steareth-30 Aerosil 380 F-40 360 = = 0.8 Aerosil 90 F-41 350 ~ 0.8 Ai oxide C F-42 360 3.0 0.8 Ethomeen T/25 Al oxide C F-43 360 3.0 0.1 Ethomeen T/25 Al oxide C F-44 360 0.3 Al oxide C F-45 360 3.0 0.3 Ethomeen T/25 Al oxide C F-46 360 6.0 0.8 Agrimul PG- Al oxide C 2069 F-47 360 3.0 0.8 Tween 20 Al oxide C Field Glyphos- % wiw Type of Type of Type of Other composition ate Fatty Surf- Coll. Other surfactant colloidal fatty acid ingredients g a.e./l acid actant partic. particulate ester ester F-48 480 1.0 0.4 Neodol 1-7 Aerosil 90 F-49 480 2.0 0.4 Agrimul PG- Aerosil 90 2069 F-50 360 1.0 10.0 1.3 ceteareth-15 Aerosil 380 Bu stearate F-51 360 1.0 10.0 1.3 ceteth-20 Aerosil 380 Bu stearate F-52 360 1.0 10.0 1.3 steareth-20 Aerosil 380 Bu stearate F-53 360 1.0 10.0 1.3 oleth-20 Aerosil 380 Bu stearate F-54 360 1.0 10.0 1.3 ceteareth-27 Aerosil 380 Bu stearate F-55 360 1.0 10.0 1.3 steareth-30 Aerosil 380 Bu stearate F-56 360 10.0 1.3 steareth-30 Aerosil 380 F-57 360 10.0 1.3 ceteareth-27 Aerosil 380 F-58 360 10.0 1.3 steareth-20 Aerosil 380 F-59 360 10.0 1.3 oleth-20 Aerosil 380 F-60 360 1.0 10.0 1.3 ceteareth-27 Aerosil 380 Me stearate F-61 360 1.0 10.0 1.3 ceteareth-27 Aerosil 380 Me palpitate F-62 300 10.0 1.3 ceteareth-27 Aerosil 380 F-63 240 10.0 1.3 ceteareth-27 Aerosil 380 F-64 360 6.0 1.3 ceteareth-27 Aerosil 380 F-65 300 6.0 1.3 ceteareth-27 Aerosil 380 F-66 240 6.0 1.3 ceteareth-27 Aerosil 380 F-67 360 0.6 Aerosil 90 F-68 360 3.1 | Aerosil 90 F-69 360 0.6 Al oxide C F-70 360 3.1 Al oxide C F-71 360 0.8 Aerosil 90 F-72 360 0.8 Al oxide C F-73 360 3.0 0.8 Ethomeen T/25 Aerosil 90 F-74 360 3.0 0.8 Ethomeen T/25 Al oxide C F-75 360 3.0 0.3 Ethomeen T/25 Al oxide C F-76 360 3.0 0.8 Ethomeen T/25 Nalco 1056 F-77 360 3.0 0.8 Ethomeen Nalco 1056 C/2S F-78 480 3.0 + 0.4 Ethomeen T/25 Al oxide C 1.0 + Agrimul PG- 2069 F-79 480 3.0 + 0.4 Ethomeen T/25 Al oxide C 3.0 + Agrimul PG- 2069 F-80 360 3.0 0.8 Agrimul PG- Aerosil 90 2069 F-81 360 3.0 0.8 Tween 20 Aerosil 90 F-82 360 3.1 + 0.8 7.1 Ethomeen T/25 Aerosil 90 (Bu)4NOH 3.1 + Tween 20 F-83 360 0.8 7.1 Aerosil 90 (Bu)4NOH F-84 480 3.0 0.8 steareth-20 Aerosil 380 F-85 480 3.0 1.5 oleth-20 Aerosil 380 Field Glyphos- % w/w " I Type of Type of Type of Other composition ate Fatty Surf- Coll. Other surfactant colloidal fatty acid ingredients g a.e./l acid actant partic. particulate ester ester F-86 480 3.0 1.5 oleth-20 Aerosil MOX-l70 F-87 480 3.0 1.5 oleth-20 Aerosil OX-50 F-88 480 3.0 1.5 Velvetex AB- Aerosil 380 45 F-89 480 3.0 1.5 steareth-20 Aerosil blend 2 F-90 480 3.0 1.5 oleth-20 Aerosil blend 2 F-91 480 4.5 1.5 oleth-20 Aerosil 380 F-92 480 4.5 1.5 steareth-20 Aerosil 380 F-93 480 3.0 1.5 steareth-20 Aerosil blend 1 F-94 480 1.0 1.5 steareth-20 Aerosil blend 1 F-95 480 @ 6.0 1.5 steareth-20 Aerosil blend 1 F-96 480 4.5 1.5 0.5 steareth-20 Aerosil propylene blend 2 glycol F-97 480 6.0 1.5 0.5 steareth-20 Aerosil propylene blend 2 glycol F-98 480 6.0 1.5 0.5 oleth-20 Aerosil propylene blend2 glycol F-99 480 4.5 + 1.5 0.5 steareth-20 + Aerosil propylene 2.3 Ethomeen T/25 blend 2 ~ glycol F-100 480 6.0 1.5 steareth-20 Al oxide C F- 101 480 4.5 + 1.5 0.5 steareth-20 + Al oxide C propylene 2.3 Ethomeen T/25 glycol F-102 480 4.5 + 1.5 0.5 steareth-20 + Al oxide C propylene 1.0 Ethomeen T/25 glycol F-103 480 3.0 1.5 steareth-20 Aerosil 380 F-104 480 4.5 1.5 steareth-20 Al oxide C F-105 480 6.0 1.5 steareth-20 Aerosil 380 F-106 480 4.5 + 1.5 0.5 steareth-20 + Aerosil 380 propylene 1.0 Ethomeen T/25 glycol F-107 480 4.5 + 1.5 0.5 steareth-20 + Aerosil 380 propylene 2.3 Ethomeen T/25 glycol F-108 480 4.5 1.5 steareth-20 Aerosil blend 2 F-109 480 6.0 1.5 steareth-20 Aerosil blend 2 F-1 10 480 4.5 + 1.5 0.5 steareth-20 + Aerosil propylene 1.0 Ethomeen T/25 blend 2 glycol F-111 480 4.5 1.5 steareth-30 Aerosil blend 2 F- 112 480 4.5 + 1.5 0.5 steareth-20 + Aerosil propylene 1.0 Ethomeen T/25 blend 2 ~ glycol Field Glyphos- % w/w Type of Type of Type of Other composition ate Fatty Surf- Coll. Other surfactant colloidal fatty acid ingredients g a.e./l acid actant partic. particulate ester ester F-113 480 6.0 1.5 steareth-30 Aerosil blend2 F-114 480 4.5 + 1.5 0.5 steareth-20 + Aerosil propylene 2.3 Ethomeen T/25 blend 2 glycol F- 115 480 10.0 1.5 steareth-20 Aerosil blend 2 F-116 480 4.5 1.5 ceteareth-27 Aerosil 380 F-117 480 6.0 1.5 ceteareth-27 Aerosil 380 F-118 480 4.5 1.5 ceteareth-27 Aerosil blend 2 F-1 19 480 6.0 1.5 ceteareth-27 Aerosil blend 2 F-120 480 4.5 1.5 ceteareth-27 Al oxide C F-121 480 6.0 1.5 ceteareth-27 Al oxide C

Aerosil blend 1: Aerosil MOX-80 + Aerosil MOX-170 (1:1) Aerosil blend 2: Aerosil MOX-80 + Aerosil 380(1:2) The above compositions were prepared as described in the Examples.

Dry compositions tested in the field have included: Field % w/w Type of Type of Other composition Glyphos- Lecithin Butyl Surfact- Coll. Other surfactant colloidal ingredients ate a.e. stearate ant partic. particulate F-l56 64 I | 25.0 2.0 steareth-20 Aerosil blend 1 F- 157 68 20.0 2.0 steareth-20 Aerosil blend 1 F-158 72 15.0 2.0 steareth-20 Aerosil blend 1 F- 159 64 25.0 1.0 ceteth-20 Aerosil 380 F-160 65 25.0 1.0 steareth-20 Aerosil 380 F-161 65 25.0 1.0 oleth-20 Aerosil 380 F-162 67 10.0 10.0 + 1.0 Fluorad Aerosil 1.5 FC-754+ 380 Ethomeen T/25 F-163 73 7.0 7.0+ 1.0 Fluorad Aerosil 1.5 FC-754+ 380 Ethomeen T/25 F- 166 68 20.0 2.0 steareth-20 Aerosil blend 1 F- 167 66 2.0 20.0 2.0 steareth-20 Aerosil blend 1

Field %w/w Type of Type of Other composition Glyphos- Lecithin Butyl Surfact- Coll. Other surfactant colloidal ingredients ate a.e. stearate ant partic. particulate F- 168 68 20.0 2.0 ~ oleth-20 Aerosil blend 1 F-169 66 2.0 20.0 2.0 oleth-20 Aerosil blend 1 F-170 66 2.0 20.0 2.0 ceteareth-27 Aerosil blend 1 Aerosil blend 1: Aerosil MOX-80 + Aerosil MOX- 170 (1:1) The above compositions were prepared by the process described for dry granular compositions in Example 27.

EXAMPLES In the following Examples illustrative of the invention, greenhouse tests were conducted to evaluate relative herbicidal effectiveness of glyphosate compositions. Compositions included for comparative purposes included the following: Formulation B: which consists of 41 % by weight of glyphosate IPA salt in aqueous solution.

This formulation is sold in the USA by Monsanto Company under the ACCORDS trademark.

Formulation C: which consists of 41% by weight of glyphosate IPA salt in aqueous solution with a coformulant (15% by weight) of a surfactant (MON 0818 of Monsanto Company) based on polyoxyethylene (15) tallowamine. This formulation is sold in Canada by Monsanto Company under the ROUNDUP trademark.

Formulation J: which consists of 41 % by weight of glyphosate IPA salt in aqueous solution, together with surfactant. This formulation is sold in the USA by Monsanto Company under the ROUNDUPB ULTRA trademark.

Formulation K: which consists of 75% by weight of glyphosate ammonium salt together with surfactant, as a water-soluble dry granular formulation. This formulation is sold in Australia by Monsanto Company under the ROUNDUP(t DRY trademark.

Formulations B, C and J contain 356 grams of glyphosate acid equivalent per liter (g a.e./l).

Formulation K contains 680 grams of glyphosate acid equivalent per kilogram (g a.e./kg).

Various proprietary excipients were used in compositions of the Examples. They may be identified as follows: Trade name Manufacturer Chemical description Aerosil 90 Degussa amorphous silica, 90 m Ig Aerosil 200 Degussa amorphous silica, 200 m Aerosil 380 Degussa amorphous silica, 380 m Aerosil MOX-80 Degussa amorphous silica/aluminum oxide, 80 m /g Aerosil MOX-170 Degussa amorphous silica/aluminum oxide, 170 m /g Aerosil OX-50 Degussa amorphous silica, 50 m /g Aerosil R-202 Degussa amorphous hydrophobic silica (dimethylsiloxane surface group) Trade name Manufacturer Chemical description Aerosil R-805 Degussa amorphous hydrophobic silica (octyl surface group) Aerosil R-812 Degussa amorphous hydrophobic silica (trimethylsilyl surface group) Aerosol OS Cytec diisopropyl naphthalene sulfate Na salt Aerosol OT Cytec dioctyl sulfosuccinate, Na salt Agrimul PG-2069 Henkel C9-11 alkylpolyglycoside Alcodet 218 Rhône- isolauryl I OEO thioether Poulenc Aluminum oxide C Degussa aluminum oxide, 100 m Amidox L-5 Stepan lauramide 5EO Ammonyx CO Stepan palmitamine oxide Ammonyx LO Stepan lauramine oxide Emphos CS-121 Witco alkylaryl ethoxylate phosphate ester Emphos CS-131 Witco alkylaryl ethoxylate phosphate ester Emphos CS-141 Witco nonylphenol 10EO phosphate Emphos CS-330 Witco alkylaryl ethoxylate phosphate ester Emphos PS-2 1 A Witco alcohol ethoxylate phosphate ester Emphos PS- 121 Witco linear alcohol ethoxylate phosphate ester, acid form Emphos PS-400 Witco linear alcohol ethoxylate phosphate ester acid form Ethomeen C/12 Akzo cocoamine 2EO Ethomeen T/12 Akzo tallowamine 2EO Ethomeen T/25 Akzo tallowamine 15EO Fluorad FC-135 3M fluorinated alkyl quaternary ammonium iodide Fluorad FC-751 3M fluorinated amphoteric surfactant Fluorad FC-754 3M fluorinated alkyl quaternary ammonium chloride Makon 4 Stepan nonylphenol 4EO Makon 6 Stepan nonylphenol 6EO Makon 30 Stepan nonylphenol 30EO Makon NF-5 Stepan polyalkoxylated aliphatic base MON 0818 Monsanto tallowamine 15EO-based surfactant Nalco 1056 Nalco silica (26%)/aluminum oxide (4%); average particle size 20 nm Neodol 1-7 Shell C11 linear alcohol 7EO Neodol 25-12 Shell Cl215 linear alcohol 12EO Neodol 25-20 Shell Cl215 linear alcohol 20EO Neodol 25-7 Shell Cl215 linear alcohol 7EO Neodol 45-13 Shell Cl215 linear alcohol 13EO Ninate 411 Stepan amine dodecylbenezene sulfonate Ninol 40-CO Stepan coco diethanolamide Pluronic 31-R1 BASF 21PO-7EO-21PO block copolymer Pluronic L-35 BASF 11EO-16PO-11EO block copolymer Polystep B-25 Stepan decyl sulfate, Na salt Reax 88B Westvaco highly sulfonated lignin, Na salt Sident 9 Degussa abrasive silica, 50 m /g Simulsol SL-4 Seppic alkyl polyglucoside Simulsol SL-10 Seppic alkyl polyglucoside Simulsol SL-II Seppic | undecyl polyglucoside Simulsol SL-62 Seppic alkyl polyglucoside Sipernat 22 Degussa hydrophilic precipitated silica, 190 m /g, av. aggregate size 100 µm Sipernat 22S Degussa hydrophilic precipitated silica, 190 m /g, av. aggregate size <10 µm Steol CS-370 Stepan lauryl EO sulfate, Na salt Stepanol WAC Stepan lauryl sulfate, Na salt

Trade name Manufacturer Chemical description Stepfac 8170 Stepan nonylphenol EO phosphate Surfynol 465 Air Products tetramethyldecyne diol 10EO Titanium dioxide Degussa titanium dioxide, average particle size 21 nm P25 Toximul 8302 Stepan alcohol EO blend Tryfac 5552 Henkel decyl EO phosphate, free acid Tween 20 ICI sorbitan monolaurate 20EO Tween 80 ICI sorbitan monooleate 20EO Tween 85 ICI sorbitan trioleate 20EO Velvetex AB-45 ~ Henkel cocobetaine Fluorad FC-135, though defined only generically as above in 3M product literature and in standard directories, has been specifically identified as C8F1 7SO2NH(CH2bN+(CH3)3 I in a paper by J. Linert & J. N. Chasman of 3M, titled "The effects of fluorochemical surfactants on recoatability" in the December 20, 1993 issue of American Paint & Coatings Journal, and reprinted as a trade brochure by 3M. Fluorad FC-750 is believed to be based on the same surfactant. Fluorad FC-754 is believed to have the structure C8F17S02NH(CH2)3N+(CH3)3 Cl that is, identical to Fluorad FC-135 but with a chloride anion replacing iodide.

Fatty alcohol ethoxylate surfactants are referred to in the Examples by their generic names as given in the International Cosmetic Ingredient Dictionary, 6th Edition, 1995 (Cosmetic Toiletry and Fragrance Association, Washington, DC). They were interchangeably sourced from various manufacturers, for example: Laureth-23: Brij 35 (ICI), Trycol 5964 (Henkel).

Ceteth-10: Brij 56 (ICI).

Ceteth-20: Brij 58 (ICI).

Steareth-lO: Brij 76 (ICI).

Steareth-20: Brij 78 (ICI), Emthox 5888-A (Henkel), STA-20 (Heterene).

Steareth-30: STA-30 (Heterene).

Steareth-100: Brij 700 (ICI).

Ceteareth-15: CS-15 (Heterene).

Ceteareth-20: CS-20 (Heterene).

Ceteareth-27: Plurafac A-38 (BASF).

Ceteareth-55: Plurafac A-39 (BASF).

Oleth-2: Brij 92 (ICI).

Oleth-10: Brij 97 (ICI).

Oleth-20: Brij 98 (ICI), Trycol 5971 (Henkel).

Where a proprietary excipient is a surfactant supplied as a solution in water or other solvent, the amount to be used was calculated on a true surfactant basis, not an "as is" basis. For example, Fluorad FC-135 is supplied as 50% true surfactant, together with 33% isopropanol and 17% water; thus to provide a composition containing 0. 1% w/w Fluorad FC-135 as reported herein, 0.2 g of the product as supplied was included in 100 g of the composition. The amount of lecithin, however, is always reported herein on an "as is" basis, regardless of the content of phospholipid in the lecithin sample used.

Spray compositions ofthe Examples contained an exogenous chemical, such as glyphosate IPA salt, in addition to the excipient ingredients listed. The amount of exogenous chemical was selected to provide the desired rate in grams per hectare (g/ha) when applied in a spray volume of 93 I/ha. Several exogenous chemical rates were applied for each composition. Thus, except where otherwise indicated, when spray compositions were tested, the concentration of exogenous chemical varied in direct proportion to exogenous chemical rate, but the concentration of excipient ingredients was held constant across different exogenous chemical rates.

Concentrate compositions were tested by dilution, dissolution or dispersion in water to form spray compositions. In these spray compositions prepared from concentrates, the concentration of excipient ingredients varied with that of exogenous chemical.

Many of the Examples feature aqueous concentrate compositions of the invention. Except where otherwise indicated, these aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared by one of the following processes (v) or (vii) to (x).

(v) A weighed amount of lecithin powder of the type indicated was placed in a beaker and deionized water was added in sufficient quantity to provide, after sonication as detailed below, a lecithin stock at a convenient concentration, normally in the range from 10% to 20% w/w and typically 15% w/w. The beaker and its contents were then placed in a Fisher Sonic Dismembrator. Model 550, fitted with a 2.4 cm probe tip with the pulse period set at 15 seconds with I minute intervals between pulses to allow cooling. Power output was set at level 8. After a total of 3 minutes of sonication (12 pulse periods) the resulting lecithin stock was finally adjusted to the desired concentration if necessary with deionized water. To prepare an aqueous concentrate formulation, the following ingredients were mixed in the appropriate proportions with mild agitation, normally in the order given although this was sometimes varied and was found in some cases to affect the physical stability of the concentrate formulation: (a) exogenous chemical, for example glyphosate IPA salt as a 62% w/w solution at pH 4.4- 4.6; (b) lecithin stock; (c) other ingredients if required; and (d) water.

(vii) Oil-in-water (O/W) emulsions were prepared as follows. The required amount of the selected oil and surfactant were mixed thoroughly. If the surfactant selected was not free-flowing at ambient temperature, heat was applied to bring the surfactant into a flowable condition before mixing with the oil. A measured amount of concentrated (62% w/w) aqueous solution of glyphosate IPA salt was added to the surfactant-oil mixture with agitation. The required amount of water was added to bring

the concentration of glyphosate and other ingredients to the desired level . The composition was finally subjected to high-shear mixing, typically using a Silverson L4RT-A mixer fitted with a medium emulsor screen, operated for 3 minutes at 7,000 rpm.

(viii) Surfactant-containing aqueous solution concentrates having no oil component were prepared as follows. A concentrated (62% w/w) aqueous solution of glyphosate IPA salt was added in the desired amount to a weighed quantity of the selected surfactant(s). If the surfactant selected is not free-flowing at ambient temperature, heat was applied to bring the surfactant into a flowable condition before adding the glyphosate solution. The required amount of water was added to bring the concentration of glyphosate and other ingredients to the desired level. The composition was finally subjected to high-shear mixing, typically using a Silverson L4RT-A mixer fitted with a medium emulsor screen, operated for 3 minutes at 7,000 rpm.

(ix) For compositions containing a colloidal particulate, the required amount by weight of the selected colloidal particulate was suspended in a concentrated (62% w/w) aqueous solution of glyphosate IPA salt and agitated with cooling to ensure homogeneity. To the resulting suspension was added the required amount by weight of the selected surfactant(s). For a surfactant which is not free-flowing at ambient temperature, heat was applied to bring the surfactant into a flowable condition before adding it to the suspension. In those instances where an oil, such as butyl stearate, was also to be included in the composition, the oil was first thoroughly mixed with the surfactant and the surfactant-oil mixture added to the suspension. To complete the aqueous concentrate, the required amount of water was added to bring the concentration of glyphosate and other ingredients to the desired level. The concentrate was finally subjected to high-shear mixing, typically using a Silverson L4RT-A mixer fitted with a medium emulsor screen, operated for 3 minutes at 7,000 rpm.

(x) The procedure for preparing aqueous concentrate formulations containing lecithin and butyl stearate was different from that followed for other lecithin-containing concentrates. Exogenous chemical, for example glyphosate IPA salt, was first added, with mild agitation, to deionized water in a formulation jar. The selected surfactant (other than lecithin) was then added, while continuing the agitation, to form a preliminary exogenous chemical/ surfactant mixture. Where the surfactant is not free-flowing at ambient temperature, the order of addition was not as above. Instead, the non-free- flowing surfactant was first added to water together with any other surfactant (other than lecithin) required in the composition, and was then heated to 550C in a shaker bath for 2 hours. The resulting mixture was allowed to cool, then exogenous chemical was added with mild agitation to form the preliminary exogenous chemical/surfactant mixture. A weighed amount of the selected lecithin was added to the preliminary exogenous chemical/surfactant mixture, with stirring to break up lumps. The mixture was left for about 1 hour to allow the lecithin to hydrate, then butyl stearate was added, with further stirring until no phase separation occurred. The mixture was then transferred to a microfluidizer (Microfluidics International Corporation, Model M-l lOF) and microfluidized for 3 to 5 cycles at 10,000

psi (69 MPa). In each cycle, the formulation jar was rinsed with microfluidized mixture. In the last cycle, the finished composition was collected in a clean dry beaker.

The following procedure was used for testing compositions of the Examples to determine herbicidal effectiveness, except where otherwise indicated.

Seeds of the plant species indicated were planted in 85 mm square pots in a soil mix which was previously steam sterilized and prefertilized with a 14-14-14 NPK slow release fertilizer at a rate of 3.6 kg/m3. The pots were placed in a greenhouse with sub-irrigation. About one week after emergence, seedlings were thinned as needed, including removal of any unhealthy or abnormal plants, to create a uniform series of test pots.

The plants were maintained for the duration of the test in the greenhouse where they received a minimum of 14 hours of light per day. If natural light was insufficient to achieve the daily requirement, artificial light with an intensity of approximately 475 microeinsteins was used to make up the difference.

Exposure temperatures were not precisely controlled but averaged about 27"C during the day and about 18"C during the night. Plants were sub-irrigated throughout the test to ensure adequate soil moisture levels.

Pots were assigned to different treatments in a fully randomized experimental design with 3 replications. A set of pots was left untreated as a reference against which effects of the treatments could later be evaluated.

Application of glyphosate compositions was made by spraying with a track sprayer fitted with a 9501E nozzle calibrated to deliver a spray volume of 93 liters per hectare (I/ha) at a pressure of 166 kilopascals (kPa). After treatment, pots were returned to the greenhouse until ready for evaluation.

Treatments were made using dilute aqueous compositions. These could be prepared as spray compositions directly from their ingredients, or by dilution with water of preformulated concentrate compositions.

For evaluation of herbicidal effectiveness, all plants in the test were examined by a single practiced technician, who recorded percent inhibition, a visual measurement of the effectiveness of each treatment by comparison with untreated plants. Inhibition of 0% indicates no effect, and inhibition of 100% indicates that all of the plants are completely dead. Inhibition of 85% or more is in most cases considered acceptable for normal herbicidal use; however in greenhouse tests such as those of the Examples it is normal to apply compositions at rates which give less than 85% inhibition, as this makes it easier to discriminate among compositions having different levels of effectiveness.

EXAMPLE 1 Glyphosate-containing spray compositions were prepared by tank-mixing Formulation B with excipients as shown in Table 1.

Velvetleaf(Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 14 days after planting ABUTH and 17 days after planting ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 18 days after application. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 1.

Table 1 Glyphosate Glyphosate rate Additive Additive rate % Inhibition composition g a.e./ha % w/v ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 112 none 4 10 224 35 30 336 75 64 Formulation B 112 MON 0818 0.01 78 45 224 69 80 336 90 91 Formulation B 112 MON 0818 0.05 60 75 224 80 75 336 85 95 Formulation B 112 MON 0818 0.10 48 55 224 75 84 336 97 93 Formulation B 112 MON 0818 0.20 65 69 224 89 93 336 95 94 Formulation B 112 MON 0818 0.50 75 75 224 94 96 336 99 99 Formulation B 112 MON 0818 1.00 79 79 224 93 98 336 99 100 Formulation B 112 MON 0818 2.00 28 68 224 65 68 336 79 79 Formulation B 112 Aerosil 90 0.01 73 73 224 75 78 336 78 79 Formulation B 112 Aerosil 90 0.05 78 40 224 78 55 336 93 65 Formulation B 112 Aerosil 90 0.10 73 30 224 90 45 336 97 76 Formulation B 112 Aerosil 90 0.20 78 15 224 93 30 336 98 68 Formulation B 112 Aerosil 90 0.50 71 10 224 89 25 336 86 30 Formulation B 112 Aerosil 90 1.00 79 0 224 79 10 336 95 33

Glyphosate Glyphosate rate Additive Additive rate I % Inhibition composition g a.e./ha % w/v ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 112 Aerosil 90 2.00 73 3 224 87 25 336 97 30 Formulation B 112 Aerosil 380 0.01 78 20 224 75 35 336 79 75 Formulation B 112 Aerosil 380 0.05 51 10 224 70 43 336 76 55 Formulation B 112 Aerosil 380 0.10 75 40 224 83 58 336 79 69 Formulation B 112 Aerosil 380 0.20 73 0 224 78 30 336 86 69 Formulation B 112 Aerosil 380 0.50 70 0 224 85 10 336 95 53 Formulation B 112 Aerosil 380 1.00 75 0 224 85 3 336 96 10 Formulation B 112 Aerosil 380 2.00 79 0 224 80 0 336 93 6 In this test, both Aerosil 90 and Aerosil 380 strongly enhanced the herbicidal effectiveness of glyphosate on ABUTH, even at very low concentrations in the spray solution. On ECHCF, Aerosil 90 gave greater enhancement than Aerosil 380 at low concentrations, but both were strongly antagonistic at high concentrations.

EXAMPLE 2 Glyphosate-containing spray compositions were prepared by tank-mixing Formulation B with excipients as shown in Table 2.

Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 21 days after planting ABUTH and 23 days after planting ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 19 days after application. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 2.

Table 2 Glyphosate Glyphosate rate Additive Additive rate % Inhibition composition g a.e./ha % v/v ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 224 none 40 43 336 53 60 448 65 77 none 0 Aerosil 90 2.0 0 0 Aerosil 200 2.0 0 0 Aerosil 380 2.0 0 0 Aluminum oxide C 2.0 0 0 Titanium dioxide P25 2.0 0 0 Formulation B 224 MON 0818 0.001 47 37 336 63 57 448 72 78 Formulation B 224 MON 0818 0.005 50 40 336 63 73 448 72 80 Formulation B 224 MON 0818 0.01 47 60 336 53 87 448 75 98 Formulation B 224 MON 0818 0.05 65 78 336 77 83 448 90 99 Formulation B 224 MON 0818 0.1 72 88 336 82 97 448 90 99 Formulation B 224 Aerosil 90 0.001 58 68 336 60 82 448 77 86 Formulation B 224 Aerosil 90 0.005 53 67 336 73 72 448 77 96 Formulation B 224 Aerosil 90 0.01 50 50 336 75 75 448 92 97 Formulation B 224 Aerosil 90 0.05 73 53 336 83 77 448 88 82 Formulation B 224 Aerosil 90 0.1 80 50 336 96 63 448 88 82 Formulation B 224 Aerosil 200 0.001 57 57 336 75 80 448 82 83 Formulation B 224 Aerosil 200 0.005 60 47 336 75 68 448 82 97 Formulation B 224 Aerosil 200 0.01 68 43 336 78 89 448 78 93 26 Glyphosate Glyphosate rate Additive Additive rate % Inhibition composition g a.e./ha ~ % v/v ABUTH I ECHCF Formulation B 224 Aerosil 200 0.05 68 55 336 70 73 448 83 87 Formulation B 224 Aerosil 200 0.1 80 73 336 85 75 448 90 97 Formulation B 224 Aerosil 380 0.001 53 53 336 67 80 448 85 91 Formulation B 224 Aerosil 380 0.005 50 50 336 77 75 448 78 90 Formulation B 224 Aerosil 380 0.01 67 65 336 75 80 448 83 98 Formulation B 224 Aerosil 380 0.05 60 80 336 80 65 448 80 82 Formulation B 224 Aerosil 380 0.1 75 75 336 75 80 448 83 96 Formulation B 224 Aluminum oxide C 0.001 50 57 336 83 98 448 77 98 Formulation B 224 Aluminum oxide C 0.005 60 57 336 73 78 448 78 87 Formulation B 224 Aluminum oxide C 0.01 57 57 336 73 73 448 77 90 Formulation B 224 Aluminum oxide C 0.05 57 50 336 73 82 448 83 77 Formulation B 224 Aluminum oxide C 0.1 72 47 336 73 63 448 80 73 Formulation B 224 Titanium dioxide P25 0.001 63 53 336 60 67 448 75 85 Formulation B 224 Titanium dioxide P25 0.005 52 53 336 63 50 448 72 60 Formulation B 224 Titanium dioxide P25 0.01 43 45 336 55 50 448 78 72 Formulation B 224 Titanium dioxide P25 0.05 55 43 336 65 53 448 70 57

Glyphosate Glyphosate rate Additive Additive rate % Inhibition composition g a.e./ha % v/v ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 224 Titanium dioxide P25 0.1 37 30 336 70 63 448 70 60 In this test, all colloidal particulate additives, at least within some range of concentrations, enhanced the herbicidal effectiveness of glyphosate on ABUTH and ECHCF. Titanium dioxide P25 gave less enhancement than other particulates and was antagonistic to glyphosate on ECHCF at the higher concentrations.

EXAMPLE 3 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 3a.

Table 3a Concentrate % w/w composition Glyphosate a.e. Fluorad FC-135 Aerosil 90 Emphos PS-21A 3-01 20 3.3 3-02 20 3.3 3-03 31 1.1 3.3 1.1 3-04 31 1.1 3.3 2.2 3-05 31 1.1 3.3 3.3 3-06 31 2.2 3.3 1.1 3-07 31 2.2 3.3 2.2 3-08 31 2.2 3.3 3.3 3-09 31 3.3 3.3 1.1 3-10 31 3.3 3.3 . 2.2 3-11 31 3.3 3.3 3.3 3-12 31 3.3 3.3 3-13 31 3.3 3.3 Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 14 days after planting ABUTH and 17 days after planting ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 23 days after application.

Formulations B, C and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 3b.

Table 3b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 150 0 8 250 18 25 350 35 40 450 75 50 Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation C 150 30 85 250 92 95 350 100 100 450 100 100 Formulation J 150 40 70 250 70 83 350 93 92 450 100 98 3-01 150 20 25 250 35 30 350 65 43 450 73 35 3-02 150 5 5 250 20 25 350 45 35 450 66 83 3-03 150 15 10 250 33 30 350 69 45 450 78 65 3-04 150 11 8 250 28 30 350 30 35 450 69 61 3-05 150 5 8 250 13 20 350 51 30 450 74 43 3-06 150 15 8 250 30 15 350 35 30 450 56 45 3-07 150 15 15 250 28 20 350 43 33 450 45 40 3-08 150 5 3 250 25 20 350 50 40 450 48 58 3-09 150 14 6 250 25 40 350 64 76 450 78 79 3-10 150 9 20 250 20 33 350 46 73 450 59 80

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition ga.e./ha ABUTH . ECHCF 3-11 150 15 11 250 20 1 28 350 30 59 450 68 48 3-12 150 20 11 250 40 30 350 73 64 450 88 83 3-13 150 15 3 250 30 25 350 40 35 450 71 75 None of the concentrate compositions of this Example containing Aerosil 90 showed herbicidal effectiveness equal to the standard Formulations C and J. It should be noted that Emphos PS-21A, present in most of the compositions of this Example, is an anionic surfactant, a class of agents known to be ineffective in enhancing glyphosate effectiveness and in some species to be antagonistic to glyphosate effectiveness.

EXAMPLE 4 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 4a. Process (viii) was followed for compositions 4-01, 4-03, 4-06, 4-07, 4- 10,4-14, 4-15,4-18 and 4-19 and process (ix) for compositions 4-02, 4-08, 4-09, 4-16 and 4-17 which contain a colloidal particulate together with surfactant. Compositions 4-04, 4-05, 4-12 and 4-13 contain colloidal particulate but no surfactant. The pH of all compositions was approximately 5.

Table 4a Concentrate % w/w composition Glyphosate Fluorad FC- Ethomeen Aluminum Titanium Aerosol a.e. 135 T/25 | oxide C dioxide P25 OT 4-01 20 3.30 4-02 20 3.30 4-03 20 3.30 4-04 20 3.30 4-05 20 0.67 4-06 20 3.30 3.30 4-07 20 3.30 0.67 4-08 20 3.30 3.30 4-09 20 0.67 3.30 4-10 20 3.30 3.30 4-11 20 3.30 0.67 4-12 20 3.30 4-13 20 0.67 4-14 20 3.30 3.30 4-15 20 3.30 0.67

Concentrate % w/w composition Glyphosate Fluorad FC- Ethomeen Aluminum r Titanium Aerosol a.e. ~ 135 I T/25 oxide C dioxide P25 OT 4-16 20 3.30 3.30 4-17 20 0.67 3.30 4-18 20 3.30 3.30 4-19 ~ 20 3.30 . 0.67 Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 18 days after planting ABUTH and 20 days after planting ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 25 days after application.

Formulations B, C and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 4b.

Table 4b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 150 8 45 250 37 55 350 40 60 450 50 70 Formulation C 150 27 72 250 73 92 350 90 99 450 92 99 Formulation J 150 25 66 250 45 88 350 78 99 450 91 100 4-01 150 40 82 250 55 93 350 74 100 450 83 100 4-02 150 9 20 250 30 73 350 38 73 450 55 97 4-03 150 13 23 250 35 79 350 45 78 450 75 100 4-04 150 18 45 250 35 65 350 35 70 450 68 81 Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 4-05 150 11 43 250 35 50 350 50 55 450 59 78 4-06 150 25 75 250 58 93 350 88 100 450 95 100 4-07 150 15 88 250 68 100 350 79 100 450 90 100 4-08 150 28 38 250 25 38 350 35 55 450 71 79 4-09 112 5 13 224 23 48 336 25 70 448 45 64 4-10 150 1 20 250 40 74 350 65 55 450 84 96 4-11 150 25 25 250 35 65 350 45 61 450 76 92 4-12 150 14 28 250 40 43 350 45 70 450 65 79 4-13 150 20 45 250 48 33 350 60 55 450 80 79 4-14 150 23 79 250 73 100 350 76 99 450 85 99 4-15 150 25 83 250 69 99 350 75 99 450 91 100 4-16 150 14 28 250 23 40 350 30 79 450 69 86

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.ejha ABUTH ECHCF 4-17 150 ' 1 20 250 23 33 350 16 45 450 40 68 4-18 150 8 15 250 49 56 350 55 58 450 83 83 4-19 150 6 15 250 35 60 350 61 63 450 63 70 In this test, aluminum oxide C gave slight further enhancement of glyphosate herbicidal effectiveness in the presence of surfactant, by comparison with surfactant alone. Titanium dioxide P25 was generally less effective in this regard.

EXAMPLE 5 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 5a.

Table 5a Concentrate % w/w Type of composition Glyphosate Aerosil 90 Surfactant surfactant a.e. 5-01 31 0.8 3.0 Ethomeen T/25 5-02 31 0.8 3.0 Surfynol 465 5-03 31 0.8 3.0 Toximul 8302 5-04 31 0.8 3.0 Ninol 40-CO 5-05 31 0.8 3.0 Pluronic 31 -Rl 5-06 31 0.8 3.0 Makon 4 5-07 31 0.8 3.0 Tween 20 5-08 31 0.8 3.0 Agrimul PG-2069 5-09 31 0.8 3.0 Alcodet 218 5-10 31 0.8 3.0 Ninate 411 5-11 31 0.8 3.0 Reax 88B 5-12 31 0.8 3.0 Stepanol WAC 5-13 31 0.8 3.0 Polystep B-25 5-14 31 0.8 3.0 Tryfac 5552 5-15 31 0.8 3.0 Stepfac 8170 5-16 31 0.8 3.0 Steol CS-370 5-17 31 0.8 3.0 Aerosol OS 5-18 31 0.8 3.0 Ammonyx CO 5-19 31 0.8 3.0 Ammonyx LO 5-20 31 0.8 3.0 Velvetex AB-45 5-21 31 ~ 0.8 - 3.0 Amidox L-5

Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 20 days after planting ABUTH and 22 days after planting ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 22 days after application.

Formulations B, C and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 5b.

Table 5b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 2 10 200 17 50 300 60 77 400 63 77 Formulation C 100 23 78 200 57 82 300 85 87 400 90 97 Formulation J 100 20 53 200 68 75 300 82 93 400 68 73 5-01 100 7 43 200 23 73 300 68 85 400 83 95 5-02 100 10 68 200 57 57 300 72 96 400 83 95 5-03 100 17 80 200 40 67 300 60 98 400 78 93 5-04 100 20 63 200 47 60 300 78 88 400 83 90 5-05 100 20 73 200 67 70 300 75 99 400 82 90 5-06 100 20 53 200 72 77 300 83 83 400 83 95 Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 5-07 100 47 75 200 70 92 300 73 100 400 83 100 5-08 100 30 80 200 67 91 300 73 98 400 82 100 5-09 100 27 50 200 37 77 300 72 93 400 77 87 5-10 100 15 37 200 30 73 300 67 91 400 83 90 5-11 100 7 47 200 33 57 300 65 63 400 75 97 5-12 100 8 63 200 30 83 300 67 98 400 78 100 5-13 100 27 85 200 33 75 300 47 78 400 63 97 5-14 100 12 50 200 37 94 300 73 95 400 78 99 5-15 100 30 85 200 60 95 300 75 96 400 83 97 5-16 100 37 50 200 43 80 300 75 97 400 82 97 5-17 100 33 47 200 67 60 300 78 83 400 85 94 5-18 100 40 53 200 70 78 300 75 97 400 87 97

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH 0 ECHCF 5-19 100 45 50 200 57 - 85 300 72 93 400 83 95 5-20 100 40 43 200 65 82 300 - 75 93 300 83 98 5-21 100 27 50 200 67 67 300 77 75 400 78 91 Several of the concentrate compositions of this Example showed surprisingly good herbicidal effectiveness, especially when it is considered that they contain only 3% w/w surfactant, by comparison, for example, with 15% w/w surfactant in the case of Formulation C.

EXAMPLE 6 Aqueous concentrate adjuvant compositions were prepared containing excipient ingredients as shown in Table 6a. The compositions were prepared by mixing the selected colloidal particulate in the selected surfactant with sufficient shear to ensure homogeneity.

Table 6a Adjuvant % w/w Type of composition Colloidal Tergitol 15-S-7 colloidal particulate particulate 6-01 5.0 2.0 Aerosil R-805 6-02 5.0 2.0 Aerosil R-202 6-03 5.0 2.0 Aerosil R-812 6-04 5.0 2.0 Aerosil OX-50 6-05 5.0 2.0 Aerosil MOX-80 6-06 5.0 2.0 Aerosil MOX-170 6-07 5.0 2.0 Aluminum oxide C Glyphosate-containing spray compositions were prepared by tank-mixing Formulation B with the adjuvant compositions of Table 6a.

Velvetleaf(Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 20 days after planting ABUTH and 22 days after planting ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 20 days after application.

Formulations B, C and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 6b.

Table 6b Glyphosate Glyphosate rate Adjuvant Adjuvant rate % Inhibition composition g a.e./ha composition % v/v ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 none 23 83 200 60 93 300 48 99 400 75 97 Formulation C 100 none 45 94 200 71 93 300 88 99 400 100 100 Formulation J 100 none 10 89 200 73 93 300 78 100 400 96 98 Formulation B 200 6-01 0.5 78 89 300 85 96 400 98 98 Formulation B 200 6-02 0.5 65 94 300 86 96 400 83 99 Formulation B 200 6-03 0.5 72 83 300 73 98 400 92 95 Formulation B 200 6-04 0.5 84 77 300 99 78 400 99 95 Formulation B 200 6-05 0.5 97 75 300 95 74 400 99 93 Formulation B 200 6-06 0.5 90 48 300 97 75 400 100 94 Formulation B 200 6-07 0.5 88 61 300 83 80 400 97 97 The adjuvant compositions of this Example strongly enhanced glyphosate herbicidal effectiveness on ABUTH. Adjuvant compositions 6-04 to 6-07 were antagonistic to glyphosate herbicidal effectiveness on ECHCF.

EXAMPLE 7 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 7a.

Table 7a Concentrate % w/w composition Glyphosate Aluminum Ethomeen Neodol Neodol a.e. I oxide C T/25 j 25-7 | 1-7 7-01 40 0.4 1.0 7-02 40 0.4 1.0 1.0 7-03 40 0.4 3.0 1.0 7-04 40 0.4 6.0 1.0 7-05 40 0.4 3.0 7-06 40 0.4 1.0 3.0 7-07 40 0.4 3.0 3.0 7-08 40 0.4 6.0 3.0 7-09 40 0.4 6.0 7-10 40 0.4 1.0 6.0 7-11 40 0.4 3.0 6.0 7-12 40 0.4 1.0 7-13 40 0.4 1.0 1.0 7-14 40 0.4 3.0 1.0 7-15 40 0.4 6.0 1.0 7-16 40 0.4 3.0 7-17 40 0.4 1.0 3.0 7-18 40 0.4 3.0 3.0 7-19 40 0.4 6.0 3.0 Velvetleaf(Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 20 days after planting ABUTH and 22 days after planting ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 16 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results. averaged for all replicates of each treatment. are shown in Table 7b.

Table 7b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 0 5 200 0 30 300 15 47 400 33 50 Formulation J 100 0 20 200 47 57 300 78 88 400 83 80 7-01 100 0 7 200 10 47 300 27 57 400 70 57 Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 7-02 100 0 7 200 2 43 300 20 60 400 72 70 7-03 100 0 30 200 13 90 300 60 92 400 73 86 7-04 100 0 30 200 20 86 300 77 92 400 90 86 7-05 100 0 20 200 7 77 300 53 95 400 68 86 7-06 100 0 10 200 12 77 400 73 83 7-07 100 0 20 200 17 50 300 62 60 400 78 70 7-08 100 0 30 200 60 50 300 78 70 400 83 82 7-09 100 0 20 200 8 50 300 65 80 400 77 79 7-10 100 0 20 200 13 50 300 70 67 400 72 83 7-11 100 0 2 200 10 40 300 37 89 400 70 77 7-12 100 0 2 200 10 30 300 13 78 400 23 87 7-13 100 0 0 200 0 33 300 18 67 400 60 87

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 7-14 100 0 0 200 17 57 300 53 96 400 78 97 7-15 100 2 10 200 30 33 300 72 100 400 77 89 7-16 100 0 2 200 10 20 300 27 70 400 30 57 7-17 100 0 0 200 0 53 300 30 80 400 47 86 7-18 100 0 0 200 0 47 300 43 89 400 63 91 7-19 100 0 0 200 20 50 300 72 95 400 73 95 Several compositions of this Example exhibited herbicidal effectiveness equal to that of Formulation J on ABUTH and some were superior to Formulation J on ECHCF. Particularly notable was the performance of composition 7-04. This Example illustrates the utility of the present invention in enabling storage-stable aqueous concentrate formulations of glyphosate to be prepared with exceptionally high loading of the active ingredient (40% w/w glyphosate a.e.) yet giving performance equal to a current commercial standard, Formulation J, which has a glyphosate a.e. loading of only about 30% w/w.

EXAMPLE 8 Glyphosate-containing spray compositions were prepared by tank-mixing Formulation B with excipients as shown in Table 8.

Velvetleaf(Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 20 days after planting ABUTH and 23 days after planting ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 19 days after application. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 8. Glyphosate Glyphosate rate Additive Additive rate % Inhibition composition g a.e./ha % v/v ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 200 none 17 50 300 62 67 400 84 70 Formulation B 200 MON 0818 0.001 30 50 300 53 77 400 70 92 Formulation B 200 MON 0818 0.005 30 73 300 63 88 400 80 75 Formulation B 200 MON 0818 0.01 33 72 300 70 85 400 85 96 Formulation B 200 MON 0818 0.05 60 85 300 88 96 400 90 96 Formulation B 200 MON 0818 0.1 57 93 300 87 99 400 93 100 Formulation B 200 Aerosil OX-50 0.001 33 86 300 60 90 400 83 100 Formulation B 200 Aerosil OX-50 0.005 30 94 300 63 72 400 85 86 Formulation B 200 Aerosil OX-50 0.01 37 70 300 67 78 400 78 80 Formulation B 200 Aerosil OX-50 0.05 30 63 300 70 73 400 86 88 Formulation B 200 Aerosil OX-50 0.1 43 50 300 78 73 400 80 84 Formulation B 200 Aerosil MOX-80 0.001 20 67 300 67 78 400 83 77 Formulation B 200 Aerosil MOX-80 0.005 27 70 300 63 75 400 75 91 Formulation B 200 Aerosil MOX-80 0.01 37 50 300 43 70 400 80 88 Formulation B 200 Aerosil MOX-80 0.05 40 67 300 70 78 400 77 83

Glyphosate Glyphosate rate Additive Additive rate % Inhibition composition g a.e./ha % v/v ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 200 Aerosil MOX-80 0.1 75 70 300 85 70 400 88 78 Formulation B 200 Aerosil MOX-170 0.001 40 88 300 63 88 400 80 82 Formulation B 200 Aerosil MOX-170 0.005 35 72 300 63 72 400 80 82 Formulation B 200 Aerosil MOX-170 0.01 27 53 300 63 53 400 73 83 Formulation B 200 Aerosil MOX-170 0.05 43 53 300 57 63 400 77 70 Formulation B 200 Aerosil MOX-170 0.1 65 50 300 77 53 400 78 70 Formulation B 200 Aluminum oxide C 0.001 18 57 300 70 72 400 77 70 Formulation B 200 Aluminum oxide C 0.005 40 50 300 57 70 400 75 82 Formulation B 200 Aluminum oxide C 0.01 23 53 300 57 60 400 72 80 Formulation B 200 Aluminum oxide C 0.05 27 60 300 43 57 400 75 68 Formulation B 200 Aluminum oxide C 0.1 27 50 300 76 50 400 83 53 No strong enhancement of glyphosate herbicidal effectiveness on ABUTH was seen with the colloidal particulates of this Example, but some colloidal particulates gave enhancement at extremely low concentrations. Aerosil OX-50 gave the best result in this test.

EXAMPLE 9 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 9a.

Table 9a Concentrate % w/w composition Glyphosate Aerosil 90 Makon 4 Makon 6 Makon 30 Makon a.e. NF-5 9-01 31.0 0.8 0.0 9-02 31.0 0.8 1.0 9-03 31.0 0.8 3.0 9-04 31.0 0.8 6.0 9-05 31.0 0.8 9.0 9-06 31.0 0.8 1.0 9-07 31.0 0.8 3.0 9-08 31.0 0.8 6.0 9-09 31.0 0.8 9.0 9-10 31.0 0.8 1.0 9-11 31.0 0.8 3.0 9-12 31.0 0.8 6.0 9-13 31.0 0.8 9.0 9-14 31.0 0.8 1.0 9-15 31.0 0.8 3.0 9-16 31.0 0.8 6.0 9-17 31.0 0.8 9.0 Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 15 days after planting ABUTH and 16 days after planting ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 19 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 9b.

Table 9b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 0 20 200 28 43 300 65 60 400 75 63 Formulation J 100 33 43 200 75 73 300 85 89 400 88 95 9-01 100 5 40 200 33 43 300 57 65 400 73 68 9-02 100 3 30 200 37 50 300 72 68 400 75 90 Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 9-03 100 3 33 200 45 63 300 75 62 400 78 67 9-04 100 7 37 200 45 53 300 73 76 400 80 60 9-05 100 15 40 200 48 50 300 77 57 400 82 67 9-06 100 2 30 200 15 43 300 45 50 400 70 53 9-07 100 0 23 200 15 43 300 48 50 400 67 60 9-08 100 2 10 200 20 40 300 62 60 400 73 57 9-09 100 0 10 200 23 33 300 40 50 400 63 53 9-10 100 3 13 200 32 40 300 55 53 400 73 57 9-11 100 2 30 200 32 47 300 62 67 400 77 75 9-12 100 3 30 200 20 40 300 68 60 400 80 77 9-13 100 0 33 200 37 50 300 62 60 400 78 73 9-14 100 0 30 200 15 47 300 42 50 400 58 67

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 9-15 100 0 20 200 7 47 300 37 50 400 62 60 9-16 100 0 10 200 8 37 300 35 50 400 55 9-17 100 0 7 200 5 33 300 33 53 400 58 50 None of the compositions of this Example equalled the performance of commercial standard Formulation J. The surfactants used are not optimal for enhancement of glyphosate activity.

EXAMPLE 10 An aqueous concentrate adjuvant composition was prepared containing excipient ingredients as shown in Table 10a. The composition was prepared by mixing the selected colloidal particulate in the selected surfactant with sufficient shear to ensure homogeneity.

Table 10a Adjuvant % w/w composition Aerosil 90 MON 0818 10-01 3.3 47.2 Glyphosate-containing spray compositions were prepared by tank-mixing Formulation B with the adjuvant composition of Table 10a.

Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 18 days after planting ABUTH and 20 days after planting ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 25 days after application.

Formulations B, C and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 10b.

Table 10b Glyphosate Glyphosate rate Adjuvant Adjuvant rate % Inhibition composition g a.e./ha composition % v/v ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 none 0 0 200 3 15 300 27 27 400 50 33

Glyphosate Glyphosate rate Adjuvant Adjuvant rate % Inhibition composition g a.e./ha composition % v/v ABUTH ECHCF Formulation C 100 none 0 28 200 55 58 300 85 85 400 98 96 Formulation J 100 none 2 27 200 38 70 300 70 94 400 95 92 Formulation B 100 10-01 0.125 7 28 200 63 63 300 67 91 400 92 94 Formulation B 100 10-01 0.25 47 35 200 68 79 300 85 98 400 98 97 Formulation B 100 10-01 0.5 63 43 200 86 92 300 99 97 400 100 98 Formulation B 100 10-01 1.0 75 25 200 96 53 300 99 98 400 100 95 Formulation B 100 10-01 2.0 65 27 200 94 52 300 99 94 400 100 100 Composition 10-01 is a highly efficacious adjuvant for glyphosate. Tank-mix addition of 10-01 at the very low concentration of 0.125% to Formulation B provided herbicidal effectiveness greater than obtained with commercial standard Formulations C and J.

EXAMPLE 11 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table I la.

Table Ila Concentrate % w/w Type of composition Glyphosate Aerosil 90 Surfactant surfactant a.e. 11-01 31 0.8 none 11-02 31 0.8 1.0 Agrimul PG-2069 11-03 31 0.8 3.0 Agrimul PG-2069 11-04 31 0.8 6.0 Agrimul PG-2069 11-05 31 0.8 9.0 Agrimul PG-2069 11-06 31 0.8 1.0 Simulsol SL-4

Concentrate % w/w Type of composition Glyphosate Aerosil 90 Surfactant surfactant a.e. 11-07 31 0.8 3.0 Simulsol SL-4 11-08 31 0.8 6.0 Simulsol SL-4 11-09 31 0.8 9.0 Simulsol SL-4 11-10 31 0.8 1.0 Simulsol SL-10 11-11 31 0.8 3.0 Simulsol SL- 10 11-12 31 0.8 6.0 Simulsol SL-10 11-13 31 0.8 9.0 Simulsol SL-10 11-14 31 0.8 1.0 SimulsolSL-1l 11-15 31 0.8 3.0 Simulsol SL- 11 11-16 31 0.8 6.0 Simulsol SL-11 11-17 31 0.8 9.0 Simulsol SL-11 11-18 31 0.8 1.0 Simulsol SL-62 11-19 31 0.8 3.0 Simulsol SL-62 11-20 31 0.8 6.0 Simulsol SL-62 11-21 31 0.8 9.0 Simulsol SL-62

Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 15 days after planting ABUTH and 17 days after planting ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 18 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. All compositions of Table l la with the exception of 11-21 were tested. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 11b.

Table lib Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 2 7 200 2 40 300 27 53 400 30 80 Formulation J 100 0 30 200 38 70 300 78 96 400 96 99 11-01 100 0 30 200 13 42 300 45 73 400 70 81 11-02 100 0 13 200 5 43 300 70 73 400 55 85 Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 11-03 100 3 23 200 10 43 300 33 75 400 58 91 11-04 100 0 20 200 5 50 300 27 78 400 80 98 11-05 100 0 20 200 17 63 300 40 75 400 70 85 11-06 100 0 20 200 20 50 300 57 84 400 53 93 11-07 100 0 20 200 10 57 300 42 91 400 67 99 11-08 100 0 17 200 15 57 300 33 92 400 67 100 11-09 100 0 7 200 10 47 300 67 80 400 75 99 11-10 100 2 3 200 13 50 300 47 83 400 72 96 11-11 100 0 8 200 2 47 300 35 85 400 70 87 11-12 100 0 23 200 2 47 300 37 87 400 75 89 11-13 100 0 20 200 5 60 300 65 82 400 73 99 11-14 100 0 10 200 10 50 300 35 75 400 48 82

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 11-15 100 0 17 200 7 60 300 33 85 400 47 87 11-16 100 0 17 200 5 47 300 30 90 400 60 98 11-17 100 0 27 200 7 47 300 35 87 400 68 93 11-18 100 0 2 200 28 53 300 62 80 400 75 93 11-19 100 3 17 200 27 58 300 55 88 400 72 99 11-20 100 0 18 200 22 53 300 50 98 400 72 95 Good herbicidal effectiveness was obtained with several compositions of this Example but none equalled the performance of Formulations C or J in this study.

EXAMPLE 12 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 12a.

Table 12a Concentrate % w/w composition Glyphosate Aerosil 90 Emphos a.e. CS-141 12-01 31 0.8 12-02 31 0.8 1.0 12-03 31 0.8 3.0 12-04 31 0.8 6.0 12-05 31 0.8 9.0 12-06 31 0.8 1.0 12-07 31 0.8 3.0 12-08 31 0.8 6.0 12-09 31 0.8 9.0 12-10 31 0.8 1.0 12-11 31 0.8 3.0

Concentrate % w/w composition Glyphosate Aerosil 90 Emphos a.e. CS-141 12-12 31 0.8 6.0 12-13 31 0.8 9.0 12-14 31 0.8 1.0 12-15 31 0.8 3.0 12-16 31 0.8 6.0 12-17 31 0.8 9.0 Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 18 days after planting ABUTH and 20 days after planting ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 18 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 12b.

Table 12b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 0 0 200 8 5 300 53 20 400 73 33 Formulation J 100 17 27 200 85 40 300 95 60 400 96 77 12-01 100 2 20 200 57 30 300 72 40 400 83 47 12-02 100 2 10 200 45 23 300 70 40 400 77 50 12-03 100 7 10 200 60 20 300 72 30 400 77 43 12-04 100 7 10 200 55 13 300 62 27 400 72 37 12-05 100 27 10 200 57 27 300 70 30 400 70 33 Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 12-06 100 0 10 200 40 30 300 72 43 400 75 43 12-07 100 7 10 200 38 30 300 63 40 400 73 53 12-08 100 0 10 200 47 40 300 70 53 400 68 53 12-09 100 3 13 200 53 30 300 57 47 400 64 47 12-10 100 2 17 200 17 33 300 73 40 400 75 53 12-11 100 3 10 200 47 33 300 68 43 400 78 57 12-12 100 3 27 200 57 37 300 75 50 400 78 63 12-13 100 70 50 200 73 47 300 72 47 400 73 40 12-14 100 2 7 200 43 30 300 68 43 400 80 50 12-15 100 2 8 200 43 30 300 70 40 400 72 50 12-16 100 3 8 200 53 17 300 73 30 400 83 50 12-17 100 10 10 200 53 17 300 77 30 400 80 50

Compositions of this Example, containing the anionic surfactant Emphos CS-141, exhibited relatively weak herbicidal effectiveness in this study.

EXAMPLE 13 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 13a.

Table 13a Concentrate % w/w Type of composition Glyphosate Aerosil 90 Surfactant surfactant a.e. 13-01 31 0.8 none 13-02 31 0.8 1.0 Emphos PS-400 13-03 31 0.8 3.0 Emphos PS-400 13-04 31 0.8 6.0 Emphos PS-400 13-05 31 0.8 9.0 Emphos PS-400 13-06 31 0.8 1.0 Emphos CS-121 13-07 31 0.8 3.0 Emphos CS-121 13-08 31 0.8 6.0 Emphos CS-121 13-09 31 0.8 9.0 Emphos CS-121 13-10 31 0.8 1.0 Emphos CS-131 13-11 31 0.8 3.0 Emphos CS-131 13-12 31 0.8 6.0 Emphos CS-131 13-13 31 0.8 9.0 Emphos CS-131 13-14 31 0.8 1.0 Emphos CS-141 13-15 31 0.8 3.0 Emphos CS-141 13-16 31 0.8 6.0 Emphos CS-141 13-17 31 0.8 9.0 Emphos CS-141 13-18 31 0.8 1.0 Stepfac 8170 13-19 31 0.8 3.0 Stepfac 8170 13-20 31 0.8 6.0 Stepfac 8170 13-21 31 0.8 9.0 Stepfac 8170 13-22 ~ 31 0.8 1.0 Tryfac 5552 13-23 31 0.8 3.0 Tryfac 5552 13-24 31 0.8 6.0 Tryfac 5552 13-25 31 0.8 9.0 Tryfac 5552 13-26 31 0.8 1.0 Emphos CS-330 13-27 31 0.8 3.0 Emphos CS-330 13-28 31 0.8 6.0 Emphos CS-330 13-28 31 0.8 9.0 Emphos CS-330 13-30 31 0.8 1.0 Emphos PS-121 13-31 31 0.8 3.0 Emphos PS-121 13-32 31 0.8 6.0 Emphos PS-121 13-33 31 0.8 9.0 ~ Emphos PS-121 Velvetleaf(Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 16 days after planting ABUTH and 18 days after planting ECHCF, and

evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 18 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Compositions 13-02 to 13-17 were not included in the test. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 13b.

Table 13b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 0 12 200 12 50 300 48 50 400 50 50 Formulation J 100 12 50 200 70 63 300 80 77 400 87 81 13-01 100 3 43 200 40 50 300 63 53 400 65 53 13-18 100 3 43 200 25 50 300 68 57 400 73 63 13-19 10 2 33 200 37 43 300 75 57 400 80 60 13-20 100 2 47 200 47 60 300 75 60 400 82 75 13-21 100 12 40 200 50 53 300 78 63 400 83 72 13-22 100 8 50 200 33 43 300 58 62 400 77 75 13-23 100 25 43 200 50 63 300 73 83 400 78 78 13-24 100 28 40 200 47 60 300 72 84 400 75 83

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 13-25 100 17 40 200 37 78 300 68 99 400 78 96 13-26 100 3 40 200 37 60 300 60 85 400 75 86 13-27 100 13 37 200 23 40 300 60 53 400 70 53 13-28 100 0 30 200 10 33 300 40 77 400 68 75 13-29 100 0 23 200 20 33 300 58 60 400 75 57 13-30 100 0 30 200 33 40 300 72 68 400 78 78 13-31 100 3 30 200 48 63 300 68 85 400 77 82 13-32 100 23 40 200 48 43 300 68 86 400 70 62 13-33 100 37 56 200 37 48 300 72 73 400 73 73 Again glyphosate compositions containing a range of anionic surfactants, in combination with colloidal particulate, failed to give herbicidal effectiveness equal to commercial standard Formulation J.

EXAMPLE 14 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 14a.

Table 14a Concentrate % w/w Type of composition Glyphosate Aerosil 90 Surfactant surfactant a.e. 14-01 31 0.8 0.0 Tween 85 14-02 31 0.8 1.0 Tween 85 14-03 31 0.8 3.0 Tween 85 14-04 31 0.8 1.0 Tween 20 14-05 31 0.8 3.0 Tween 20 14-06 31 0.8 6.0 Tween 20 14-07 31 0.8 9.0 Tween 20 14-08 31 0.8 1.0 Tween 80 14-09 31 0.8 3.0 Tween 80 14-10 31 0.8 6.0 Tween 80 14-11 31 0.8 9.0 Tween 80 Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 16 days after planting ABUTH and 18 days after planting ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 20 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 14b.

Table 14b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 150 0 30 250 3 50 350 37 70 450 38 97 Formulation J 150 20 63 250 62 83 350 88 98 450 96 100 14-01 150 13 53 250 25 63 350 47 73 450 62 82 14-02 150 7 40 250 20 57 350 43 80 450 48 95 14-03 150 10 43 250 28 57 350 55 77 450 62 98

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 14-04 150 10 47 250 32 87 350 52 92 450 68 99 14-05 150 7 57 250 25 91 350 60 90 450 77 100 14-06 150 20 60 250 28 70 350 65 97 450 78 99 14-07 150 20 63 250 42 94 350 77 100 450 86 100 14-08 150 15 83 250 62 93 350 55 98 450 83 100 14-09 150 12 67 250 33 98 350 70 100 450 75 100 14-10 150 23 80 250 53 94 350 70 99 450 78 99 14-11 150 5 50 250 60 90 350 80 95 450 83 99 Certain compositions of this Example exhibited glyphosate herbicidal effectiveness on ECHCF superior to that obtained with Formulation J. Compositions containing Tween 20 or Tween 80 as surfactant generally outperformed those containing Tween 85.

EXAMPLE 15 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table I Sa.

Table 15a Concentrate % w/w Type of composition Glyphosate Aluminum Surfactant surfactant a.e. I oxide C 15-01 31 0.8 3.0 Ethomeen T/25 15-02 31 0.8 3.0 Ethomeen C/25 15-03 31 0.8 3.0 Ethomeen T/12 15-04 31 0.8 3.0 Tryfac 5552 15-05 31 0.8 3.0 Agrimul PG-2069 15-06 31 0.8 3.0 Reax 88B 15-07 31 0.8 3.0 Velvetex AB-45 15-08 31 0.8 3.0 Polystep B-25 15-09 31 0.8 3.0 Ninol 40-CO 15-10 31 0.8 3.0 Steol CS-370 15-11 31 1 0.8 ~ 3.0 Ammonyx CO 15-12 31 0.8 3.0 Makon 4 15-13 31 0.8 3.0 Ammonyx LO 15-14 31 0.8 3.0 Stepfac 8170 15-15 31 0.8 3.0 Pluronic L-35 15-16 31 0.8 3.0 Toximul 8302 15-17 31 0.8 3.0 Pluronic 31-R1 15-18 31 0.8 3.0 Ninate 411 15-19 31 0.8 3.0 Stepanol WAC Velvetleaf(Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 14 days after planting ABUTH and 16 days after planting ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 19 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 15b.

Table 15b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 2 5 200 40 20 300 63 23 400 65 27 Formulation J 100 57 40 200 90 78 300 93 80 400 93 91 15-01 100 23 200 45 53 300 75 62 400 80 73 Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 15-02 100 17 10 200 42 43 300 75 60 400 80 70 15-03 100 0 5 200 22 45 300 68 37 400 73 53 15-04 100 3 0 200 32 20 300 72 37 400 73 40 15-05 100 5 7 200 40 33 300 63 72 400 72 65 15-06 100 10 7 200 35 23 300 68 27 400 67 27 15-07 100 5 2 200 30 30 300 70 40 400 77 43 15-08 100 0 0 200 30 7 300 68 23 400 72 30 15-09 100 0 0 200 5 5 300 50 13 400 67 13 15-10 100 3 3 200 23 5 300 60 20 400 70 33 15-11 100 0 5 200 20 27 300 53 40 400 68 40 15-12 100 3 5 200 28 20 300 60 30 400 67 33 15-13 100 3 0 200 33 37 300 60 47 400 72 63

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 15-14 100 3 7 200 33 37 300 60 50 400 78 60 15-15 100 0 5 200 40 40 300 70 60 400 75 70 15-16 100 0 8 200 32 33 300 57 43 400 72 67 15-17 100 13 7 200 27 43 300 67 67 400 67 73 15-18 100 2 7 200 25 23 300 52 53 400 68 67 15-19 100 0 0 200 22 20 300 40 30 400 72 37 Compositions of this Example exhibited relatively weak herbicidal effectiveness by comparison with Formulation J.

EXAMPLE 16 Aqueous concentrate adjuvant compositions were prepared containing excipient ingredients as shown in Table 16a. The compositions were prepared by mixing the selected colloidal particulate in the selected surfactant with sufficient shear to ensure homogeneity.

Table 16a Adjuvant % w/w composition Aluminum Ethomeen Ethomeen Ethomeen Oxide C T/12 T/25 C/12 16-01 33 16-02 1.65 33 16-03 2.20 33 16-04 3.30 33 16-05 6.60 33 16-06 33 16-07 1.65 33 16-08 2.20 33 16-09 3.30 33 16-10 6.60 ~ 33

Adjuvant % w/w composition Aluminum Ethomeen Ethomeen Ethomeen Oxide C T/12 T/25 C/12 16-11 33 16-12 1.65 33 16-13 2.20 33 16-14 3.30 33 Glyphosate-containing spray compositions were prepared by tank-mixing Formulation B with the adjuvant compositions of Table 16a.

Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 17 days after planting ABUTH and 17 days after planting ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 19 days after application. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 16b.

Table 16b Glyphosate Glyphosate rate Adjuvant Adjuvant rate % Inhibition composition g a.e./ha composition % v/v ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 200 none 20 40 300 55 43 400 68 50 Formulation B 200 16-01 0.5 47 53 300 77 98 400 79 99 Formulation B 200 16-01 1.0 67 53 300 78 73 400 85 97 Formulation B 200 16-02 0.5 60 75 300 77 80 400 80 89 Formulation B 200 16-02 1.0 73 68 300 - 83 95 400 92 99 Formulation B 200 16-03 0.5 65 72 300 75 70 400 78 96 Formulation B 200 16-03 1.0 75 80 300 80 0 93 400 90 95 Formulation B 200 16-04 0.5 70 73 300 72 94 400 80 98 Formulation B 200 16-04 1.0 77 80 300 80 60 400 92 99 Glyphosate Glyphosate rate Adjuvant Adjuvant rate % Inhibition composition g a.e./ha composition %v/v ABUTH | ECHCF Formulation B 200 16-05 0.5 68 73 300 77 93 400 80 87 Formulation B 200 16-05 1.0 77 70 300 90 99 400 95 100 Formulation B 200 16-06 0.5 78 88 300 88 82 400 96 96 Formulation B 200 16-06 1.0 80 80 300 96 97 400 97 98 Formulation B 200 16-07 0.5 77 70 300 95 75 400 95 97 Formulation B 200 16-07 1.0 88 83 300 97 75 400 97 88 Formulation B 200 16-08 0.5 77 80 300 93 99 400 97 86 Formulation B 200 16-08 1.0 88 80 300 92 73 400 98 93 Formulation B 200 16-09 0.5 77 87 300 94 82 400 88 93 Formulation B 200 16-09 1.0 90 77 300 88 97 400 98 97 Formulation B 200 16-10 0.5 77 70 300 87 83 400 98 98 Formulation B 200 16-10 1.0 94 73 300 94 92 400 96 93 Formulation B 200 16-11 0.5 43 60 300 60 91 400 78 88 Formulation B 200 16-11 1.0 40 60 300 70 82 400 82 99 Formulation B 200 16-12 0.5 38 62 300 68 78 400 78 90 Formulation B 200 16-12 1.0 60 65 300 73 97 400 83 92

Glyphosate Glyphosate rate Adjuvant Adjuvant rate % Inhibition composition g a.e./ha composition % v/v ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 200 16-13 0.5 40 43 300 77 80 400 80 80 Formulation B 200 16-13 1.0 58 52 300 77 65 400 88 70 Formulation B 200 16-14 0.5 62 45 300 72 75 400 85 87 Formulation B 200 16-14 1.0 65 40 300 83 67 400 89 86 Compositions 16-01 to 16-14 were effective adjuvants for glyphosate Formulation B in this study.

EXAMPLE 17 Storage stable dry granular concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 17a. The preparation procedure was as follows.

Ammonium glyphosate powder was added to a blender. Excipient ingredients were slowly added, together with sufficient water to wet the powder and form a stiff dough. The blender was operated for sufficient time to thoroughly mix all ingredients. The dough was then transferred to extrusion apparatus and was extruded to form granules, which were finally dried in a fluid bed dryer.

Table 17a Concentrate % w/w composition Glyphosate Aerosil 90 Aluminum inumTallowamine a.e. Oxide C 20EO 17-01 68.0 0.8 21.0 17-02 68.0 0.8 21.0 Velvetleaf(Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 15 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 20 days after application.

Formulations B, J and K were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 17b.

Table Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 150 0 20 250 0 30 350 0 40 450 43 45 Formulation J 150 13 30 250 62 47 350 78 60 450 92 72 Formulation K 150 10 33 250 55 75 350 75 83 450 80 85 17-01 150 23 40 250 60 82 350 75 73 450 83 81 17-02 150 25 33 250 72 53 350 92 63 450 98 77 Composition 17-01 exhibited herbicidal effectiveness comparable to that of commercial Formulations J and K. Composition 17-02 was considerably more herbicidally effective than the commercial formulations on ABUTH though less so on ECHCF in this test.

EXAMPLE 18 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 18a.

Table 18a Concentrate % w/w Type of composition Glyphosate Agrimul Aerosil Aerosil a.e. I PG-2069 18-01 31 3.0 0.8 MOX-170 18-02 31 3.0 0.4 MOX-170 18-03 31 3.0 1.5 MOX-170 18-04 31 3.0 0.8 MOX-80 18-05 31 3.0 0.4 MOX-80 18-06 31 3.0 1.5 MOX-80 18-07 31 3.0 0.8 OX-50 18-08 31 3.0 0.4 OX-50 18-09 31 3.0 1.5 OX-50 18-10 31 3.0 0.8 380 18-11 31 3.0 0.4 380 18-12 31 3.0 1.5 380 18-13 31 3.0 0.8 90 63

Concentrate % w/w Type of composition Glyphosate Agrimul Aerosil Aerosil a.e. PG-2069 18-14 31 3.0 0.4 90 18-15 31 3.0 1.5 90 Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 15 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 18 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 18b.

Table 18b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 150 17 7 250 18 27 350 33 40 450 50 43 Formulation J 150 30 33 250 50 40 350 73 53 450 90 77 18-01 150 5 23 250 30 40 350 47 53 450 70 70 18-02 150 13 37 250 33 43 350 47 60 450 63 63 18-03 150 27 43 250 37 63 350 53 65 450 70 72 18-04 150 15 47 250 60 72 350 76 72 450 85 77 18-05 150 13 43 250 30 63 350 63 73 450 72 75 18-06 150 10 40 250 33 57 350 65 67 450 82 73

Concentrate composition glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 18-07 150 17 43 250 33 60 350 53 67 450 75 72 18-08 150 13 50 250 37 53 350 70 65 450 78 75 18-09 150 13 43 250 58 67 350 60 77 450 83 80 18-10 150 12 57 250 22 58 350 40 70 450 83 80 18-11 150 23 43 250 55 60 350 62 63 450 77 83 18-12 150 20 47 250 60 60 350 65 72 450 80 80 18-13 150 18 47 250 40 57 350 70 63 450 73 90 18-14 150 18 43 250 37 60 350 67 70 450 77 87 18-15 150 23 50 250 40 63 350 75 77 450 78 80 Several compositions of this Example exhibited glyphosate herbicidal effectiveness on ECHCF superior to that of Formulation J.

EXAMPLE 19 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 19a.

Table 19a Concentrate Glyphosate % w/w Type of composition g a.e./l Aerosil | Aerosil 19-01 484 0.4 90 19-02 484 0.8 J 90 19-03 484 1.5 90 19-04 484 0.4 380 19-05 484 0.8 380 19-06 484 1.5 380 19-07 484 0.4 OX-50 19-08 484 0.8 OX-50 19-09 484 1.5 OX-50 19-10 484 0.4 MOX-80 19-11 484 0.8 MOX-80 19-12 484 1.5 MOX-80 19-13 484 0.4 MOX- 170 19-14 484 0.8 MOX-170 19-15 484 1.5 MOX-170 Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 14 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 16 days after application.

Formulations B and J were appiied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 19b.

Table 19b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 150 7 40 250 70 50 350 80 57 450 83 70 Formulation J 150 70 50 250 90 75 350 98 97 450 99 96 19-01 150 30 47 250 57 50 350 57 60 450 70 65 19-02 150 20 23 250 50 40 350 60 50 450 80 67 Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 19-03 150 18 20 250 60 50 350 80 67 450 83 65 19-04 150 7 27 250 50 43 350 72 67 450 83 77 19-05 150 2 27 250 50 47 350 73 63 450 83 75 19-06 150 2 20 250 60 43 350 72 60 450 75 63 19-07 150 3 20 250 40 53 350 65 57 450 78 65 19-08 150 8 23 250 43 45 350 67 72 450 80 73 19-09 150 2 27 250 53 45 350 72 53 450 75 57 19-10 150 5 23 250 40 40 350 missing missing 450 77 47 19-11 150 5 23 250 40 43 350 72 47 450 78 67 19-12 150 5 17 250 47 40 350 77 45 450 83 63 19-13 150 5 20 250 37 40 350 73 57 450 80 60 19-14 150 0 27 250 43 40 350 68 43 450 78 47

Concentrate composition - Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 19-15 150 5 ~ 30 250 45 43 350 70 73 450 77 88 Concentrate compositions of glyphosate containing colloidal particulates but no surfactant did not show significant enhancement over Formulation B in this test.

EXAMPLE 20 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 20a.

Table 20a Concentrate Glyphosate % w/w composition g a.e./l Butyl Ethomeen Neodol Agrimul Aluminum stearate T/25 1-7 | PG-2069 oxide C 20-01 484 0.4 20-02 484 5.0 0.4 20-03 484 5.0 20-04 484 6.0 1.0 0.4 20-05 484 7.0 2.0 0.4 20-06 484 0.3 6.0 1.0 0.4 20-07 484 4.0 1.0 0.4 20-08 484 5.0 2.0 0.4 20-09 484 0.3 4.0 1.0 0.4 Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 14 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 17 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 20b.

Table 20b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH | ECHCF Formulation B 150 0 1 23 250 38 30 350 65 40 450 75 40 Formulation J 150 65 50 250 77 80 350 93 93 450 98 94

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 20-01 150 58 33 250 65 40 350 78 43 450 78 47 20-02 150 32 20 250 63 33 350 72 40 450 83 47 20-03 150 67 43 250 93 75 350 93 84 450 100 87 20-04 150 72 43 250 94 82 350 98 89 450 100 95 20-05 150 63 40 250 77 60 350 97 83 450 99 82 20-06 150 70 40 250 78 72 350 98 83 450 99 93 20-07 150 65 78 250 87 missing 350 88 89 450 99 95 20-08 150 73 63 250 78 88 350 82 94 450 82 77 20-09 150 58 55 250 78 83 350 88 86 450 99 91 The inclusion of colloidal aluminum oxide in a glyphosate composition containing Ethomeen T/25 appeared to reduce herbicidal effectiveness in this study (compare 20-02 and 20-03).

EXAMPLE 21 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 21a. All contain colloidal particulates and were prepared by process (ix).

All compositions of this example showed acceptable storage stability. The compositions containing oleth-20 were not acceptably storage-stable in the absence of the colloidal particulate.

Table 21a Concentrate Glyphosate % w/w Type of composition g a.e./l Butyl Oleth-20 Aerosil Aerosil stearate 21-01 488 3.0 0.4 90 21-02 488 3.0 0.8 90 21-03 488 3.0 1.5 90 21-04 488 0.4 90 21-05 488 0.8 90 21-06 488 1.5 90 21-07 488 3.0 0.4 380 21-08 488 3.0 0.8 380 21-09 488 3.0 1.5 380 21-10 488 0.4 380 21-11 488 0.8 380 21-12 488 1.5 380 21-13 ~ 488 3.0 0.4 OX-50 21-14 488 3.0 0.8 OX-50 21-15 488 3.0 1.5 OX-50 21-16 ~ 488 0.4 OX-50 21-17 488 0.8 OX-50 21-18 488 1.5 OX-50 21-19 488 3.0 0.4 MOX-80 21-20 488 3.0 0.8 MOX-80 21-21 488 3.0 1.5 MOX-80 21-22 488 0.4 MOX-80 21-23 488 0.8 MOX-80 21-24 488 1.5 MOX-80 21-25 488 3.0 0.4 MOX-170 21-26 488 3.0 0.8 MOX-170 21-27 488 3.0 1.5 MOX-170 21-28 488 0.4 MOX-170 21-29 488 0.8 MOX-170 21-30 488 1.5 MOX-170 21-31 488 3.0 3.0 1.5 MOX-80 Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 14 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 20 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Compositions 21-01 to 21-12 were not included in the test. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 21b.

Table 21b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 150 0 27 250 17 37 350 47 57 450 60 60 Formulation J 150 57 50 250 82 87 350 95 99 450 98 99 21-13 150 37 60 250 73 70 350 96 97 450 96 99 21-14 150 43 50 250 73 63 350 93 96 450 98 99 21-15 150 53 60 250 83 87 350 87 97 450 98 98 21-16 150 45 40 250 57 60 350 78 95 450 94 100 21-17 150 47 50 250 60 82 350 92 96 450 95 99 21-18 150 38 53 250 68 96 350 82 99 450 83 95 21-19 150 50 57 250 87 88 350 91 99 450 98 98 21-20 150 53 50 250 88 85 350 96 97 450 97 100 21-21 150 40 30 250 37 47 350 57 80 450 77 94

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 21-22 150 47 50 250 70 95 350 75 99 450 77 98 21-23 150 27 60 250 72 85 350 82 98 450 75 99 21-24 150 37 57 250 73 86 350 80 99 450 85 100 21-25 150 45 53 250 85 94 350 95 100 450 98 99 21-26 150 50 50 250 78 83 350 94 98 450 98 99 21-27 150 53 67 250 75 88 350 93 97 450 96 99 21-28 150 42 50 250 47 96 350 70 98 450 90 99 21-29 150 27 83 250 57 98 350 87 99 450 87 100 21-30 150 33 60 250 47 94 350 83 99 450 93 99 21-31 150 45 47 250 80 73 350 96 94 450 99 98 Remarkably high levels of herbicidal effectiveness were obtained in this test with compositions containing oleth-20 at a weight/weight ratio to glyphosate a.e. of about 1:14, and stabilized with colloidal particulates. In some cases the colloidal particulate alone contributed a major part of the efficacy enhancement. Results with composition 21-21 are out of line with other data and an application problem is suspected.

EXAMPLE 22 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 22a. Concentrate compositions 22-13 and 22-14 are aqueous solution concentrates and were prepared by process (viii). Concentrate compositions 22-01 to 22-12 and 22-15 are aqueous solution concentrates containing colloidal particulates and were prepared by process (ix).

Concentrate compositions 22-16 and 22-17 contained colloidal particulates but no surfactant.

Where a blend of two different colloidal particulates was used, these were included at a 1:1 weight ratio.

In the absence of colloidal particulate, it was not possible to make a storage stable aqueous concentrate having a glyphosate loading of 480 g a.e./l or higher in the presence of 3% w/w oleth-20. In order to test comparative herbicidal efficacy with and without colloidal particulate, two compositions (22-01 and 22-02) were made at a much lower glyphosate loading with no colloidal particulate and a similar glyphosate/oleth-20 ratio to the other compositions of this Example. No difference between compositions 22-01 and 22-02 are recorded.

Compositions 22-13 and 22-14 (both containing 162 g a.e./l glyphosate) showed acceptable storage stability. However, at glyphosate loadings >480 g a.e./l (as in compositions 22-01 to 22-12 and 22-15) storage-stable compositions containing 3% oleth-20 could not be made except with the addition of colloidal particulate as shown below.

Table 22a Concentrate Glyphosate % w/w Type of composition g a.e./l Oleth-20 Glycerin Aerosil Aerosil 22-01 162 ~ 1.13 none 22-02 162 1.13 none 22-03 492 3.00 2.0 0.8 380 22-04 492 | 3.00 5.0 1.5 380 22-05 492 3.00 2.0 0.8 380 22-06 492 3.00 5.0 1.5 380 22-07 492 3.00 0.8 OX-50 22-08 492 3.00 1.5 OX-50 22-09 492 3.00 0.8 380iox-50 blend 22-10 492 3.00 1.5 380/OX-SO blend 22-11 492 3.00 0.8 380 22-12 492 3.00 1.5 380 22-13 492 3.00 0.8 380 22-14 492 3.00 1.5 380 22-15 492 3.00 2.0 1.5 380 22-16 488 0.8 380 22-17 488 1.5 380 Velvetleaf(Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray

compositions were made 17 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 18 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 22b.

Table 22b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 150 18 40 250 57 53 350 72 63 450 83 85 Formulation J 150 70 65 250 85 95 350 98 98 450 100 99 22-01 150 50 40 250 68 75 350 95 92 450 99 95 22-02 150 40 33 250 70 82 350 93 89 450 98 93 22-03 150 62 67 250 72 93 350 99 96 450 99 97 22-04 150 57 50 250 70 91 350 92 97 450 99 99 22-05 150 48 40 250 68 67 350 97 97 450 98 98 22-06 150 55 50 250 82 83 350 95 90 450 99 94 22-07 150 65 43 250 87 87 350 100 94 450 96 95 22-08 150 55 53 250 75 82 350 95 95 450 100 96

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 22-09 150 45 83 250 78 82 350 90 93 450 95 99 22-10 150 55 47 250 75 88 350 93 99 450 99 97 22-11 150 47 47 250 65 82 350 78 99 450 97 97 22-12 150 47 40 250 72 96 350 77 80 450 85 97 22-13 150 37 53 250 73 82 350 80 83 450 90 92 22-14 150 35 57 250 70 82 350 80 97 450 90 99 22-15 150 23 33 250 67 73 350 83 91 450 94 92 22-16 150 13 40 250 45 50 350 62 72 450 77 77 22-17 150 7 33 250 50 50 350 60 70 450 75 73 Several high-loaded (492 g a.e./l) glyphosate compositions containing oleth-20 at just 3% exhibited surprisingly high herbicidal effectiveness, approaching or equalling that of commercial standard Formulation J, which is loaded at only about 360 g a.e./l and has a much higher surfactant to glyphosate ratio. Especially effective compositions included 22-07 to 22-10.

EXAMPLE 23 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 23a. Concentrate composition 23-08 to 23-14 are oil-in-water emulsions

and were prepared by process (vii). Concentrate compositions 23-15 to 23-17 are aqueous solution concentrates and were prepared by process (viii). Concentrate compositions 23-01 to 23-07 contain colloidal particulates and were prepared by process (ix).

Compositions 23-08 to 23-17 (all containing 163 g a.e./l glyphosate) showed acceptable storage stability. However, at a glyphosate loading of 400 g a.e./l (as in compositions 23-01 to 23-07) storage- stable compositions containing 0.5-1% butyl stearate and 5-10% alkylether surfactant could not be made except with the addition of colloidal particulate as shown below.

Table 23a Concentrate Glyphosate % w/w Type of composition g a.e./l Butyl Surfactant Aerosil 90 surfactant stearate 23-01 400 1.0 10.0 1.0 ceteareth-27 23-02 400 1.0 10.0 1.0 steareth-20 23-03 400 0.5 5.0 1.0 ceteareth-27 23-04 400 0.5 5.0 1.0 steareth-20 23-05 400 1.0 5.0 1.0 ceteareth-27 23-06 400 1.0 5.0 1.0 steareth-20 23-07 400 1.0 5.0 1.0 steareth-30 23-08 163 0.5 5.0 oleth-20 23-09 163 0.5 5.0 steareth-20 23-10 163 0.5 5.0 ceteth-20 23-11 163 0.5 5.0 laureth-23 23-12 163 0.5 5.0 ceteareth-27 23-13 163 0.5 5.0 Neodol 25-12 23-14 163 0.5 5.0 Neodol 25-20 23-15 163 5.0 steareth-20 23-16 163 5.0 ceteth-20 23-17 163 5.0 laureth-23 Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 18 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 19 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 23b.

Table 23b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 150 0 40 250 20 60 350 68 82 450 83 X 96 Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha AUBTH ECHCF Formulation J 150 43 89 250 93 100 350 100 100 450 100 100 Formulation C 150 68 93 250 93 99 350 100 100 450 100 100 23-01 150 78 97 250 96 100 350 98 100 450 100 100 23-02 150 91 98 250 100 100 350 100 100 450 100 100 23-03 150 90 97 250 99 99 350 100 100 450 100 100 23-04 150 77 98 250 100 100 350 100 100 450 100 100 23-05 150 82 93 250 100 99 350 100 100 450 100 100 23-06 150 83 85 250 100 99 350 100 100 450 100 100 23-07 150 83 87 250 100 100 350 100 100 450 100 100 23-08 150 90 92 250 100 100 350 100 100 450 100 100 23-09 150 90 85 250 100 98 350 100 100 450 100 100 23-10 150 80 85 250 100 92 350 100 100 450 100 100

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 23-11 150 83 88 250 96 99 350 100 98 450 100 100 23-12 150 93 85 250 100 99 350 100 100 450 100 100 23-13 150 72 73 250 92 97 350 100 99 450 100 100 23-14 150 72 80 250 99 99 350 100 100 450 100 100 23-15 150 100 93 250 100 99 350 100 100 450 100 100 23-16 150 100 98 250 100 100 350 100 100 450 100 100 23-17 150 83 83 250 100 99 350 100 99 450 100 99 Outstanding herbicidal effectiveness was provided by compositions containing C16.18 alkylether surfactants (ceteareth-27, steareth-20, steareth-3 0, oleth-20, ceteth-20). High-loaded (400 g a.e./l) glyphosate compositions containing a C16.18 alkylether surfactant, butyl stearate and a colloidal particulate (Aerosil 90) to stabilize the compositions performed especially impressively in this test.

EXAMPLE 24 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 24a. Concentrate compositions 24-01 to 24-12 are aqueous solution concentrates containing colloidal particulates and were prepared by process (ix). Concentrate compositions 24-13 to 24-18 contained colloidal particulates but no surfactant.

The colloidal particulates of this example were in general too large to confer good storage stability to the compositions tested.

Table 24a Concentrate Glyphosate % X w/w Type of Type of composition g a.e./l Surfactant Silica surfactant silica 24-01 488 3.0 1 0.8 steareth-20 Sident 9 24-02 488 3.0 0.8 steareth-20 Sipernat 22 24-03 488 3.0 0.8 steareth-20 Sipernat 22S 24-04 488 3.0 0.8 oleth-20 Sident 9 24-05 488 3.0 0.8 oleth-20 Sipernat 22 24-06 488 3.0 0.8 oleth-20 Sipernat 22S 24-07 488 3.0 1.5 steareth-20 Sident 9 24-08 488 3.0 1.5 steareth-20 Sipernat 22 24-09 488 3.0 1.5 steareth-20 Sipemat 22S 24-10 488 3.0 1.5 oleth-20 Sident9 24-11 488 3.0 1.5 oleth-20 Sipernat 22 24-12 488 3.0 1.5 oleth-20 Sipernat 22S 24-13 488 0.8 none Sident 9 24-14 488 1.5 none Sipernat 22 24-15 488 0.8 none Sipernat 22S 24-16 488 1.5 none Sident9 24-17 488 0.8 none Sipernat 22 24-18 488 1.5 none Sipernat 22S Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 21 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 14 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 24b.

Table 24b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 3 37 200 10 57 300 43 87 400 57 88 Formulation J 100 33 80 200 72 98 300 96 99 400 97 99 24-01 100 47 89 200 78 97 300 87 99 400 98 99 24-02 100 37 83 200 70 99 300 90 99 400 95 100 Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 24-03 100 40 89 200 70 99 300 90 100 400 95 100 24-04 100 37 94 200 58 98 300 87 99 400 95 100 24-05 100 30 60 200 73 95 300 85 99 400 97 99 24-06 100 33 67 200 70 97 300 78 99 400 92 100 24-07 100 32 81 200 60 99 300 83 98 400 88 100 24-08 100 40 63 200 65 93 300 90 99 400 90 100 24-09 100 43 70 200 55 98 300 88 99 400 94 100 24-10 100 33 91 200 70 99 300 83 99 400 94 99 24-11 100 20 63 200 70 97 300 92 100 400 94 100 24-12 100 48 67 200 70 93 300 88 98 400 94 100 24-13 100 20 50 200 60 83 300 83 97 400 94 99 24-14 100 43 43 200 67 88 300 83 97 400 91 99

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 24-15 100 30 50 200 67 73 300 77 96 400 97 96 24-16 100 43 43 200 75 79 300 87 94 400 87 91 24-17 100 40 27 200 68 53 300 87 92 400 93 98 24-18 100 47 10 200 75 37 300 83 63 400 92 88 Many of the high-load (488 g a.e./l) glyphosate formulations of this Example exhibited herbicidal effectiveness equal to or greater than that obtained with commercial standard Formulation J, in spite of containing only 3% alkylether surfactant.

EXAMPLE 25 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 25a. Concentrate compositions 25-01 to 25-04, 25-06, 25-08, 25-10 and 25-18 are oil-in-water emulsions and were prepared by process (vii). Concentrate compositions 25-05, 25-07 and 25-09 are aqueous solution concentrates and were prepared by process (viii). Concentrate compositions 25-11 to 25-17 contain colloidal particulates and were prepared by process (ix).

The compositions of this example all showed acceptable storage stability. The compositions shown as containing colloidal particulate were not storage-stable unless the colloidal particulate was included as shown.

Table 25a Concentrate Glyphosate yow/w Type of composition g a.e./l Butyl Surfactant Aerosil 380 surfactant stearate 25-01 163 0.5 5.0 steareth-20 25-02 163 0.5 5.0 ceteareth-27 25-03 163 0.5 5.0 oleth-20 25-04 163 0.5 5.0 ceteth-20 25-05 163 5.0 ceteth-20 25-06 163 0.5 5.0 Neodol 45-13 25-07 163 5.0 Neodol 45-13 25-08 163 0.5 5.0 ceteareth-15 25-09 163 5.0 ceteareth-15

Concentrate Glyphosate % w/w Type of composition g a.e./l Butyl Surfactant Aerosil 380 surfactant stearate 25-10 163 0.5 5.0 steareth-30 25-11 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 ceteth-20 25-12 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 Neodol 45-13 25-13 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 ceteareth-15 25-14 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 steareth-30 25-15 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 steareth-20 25-16 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 oleth-20 25-17 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 ceteareth-27 Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 22 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 18 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 25b.

Table 25b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 0 30 200 2 60 300 17 75 400 50 73 Formulation J 100 20 63 200 42 98 300 75 100 400 83 98 25-01 100 27 57 200 67 98 300 80 99 400 87 98 25-02 100 27 63 200 53 87 300 77 99 400 87 99 25-03 100 12 50 200 53 99 300 65 100 400 83 99 25-04 100 20 63 200 50 98 300 73 98 400 87 98 Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 25-05 100 18 70 200 57 93 300 80 99 400 83 99 25-06 100 17 63 200 35 95 300 60 100 400 75 100 25-07 100 3 43 200 43 95 300 62 100 400 68 96 25-08 100 20 43 200 43 88 300 75 99 400 80 97 25-09 100 37 57 200 55 93 300 83 100 400 83 99 25-10 100 37 50 200 60 96 300 83 99 400 88 99 25-11 100 8 37 200 37 93 300 68 99 400 70 97 25-12 100 13 43 200 40 91 300 67 100 400 77 96 25-13 100 25 40 200 40 80 300 62 97 400 78 98 25-14 100 23 33 200 37 86 300 75 99 400 78 94 25-15 100 23 30 200 43 78 300 53 93 400 78 98 25-16 100 23 37 200 37 95 300 63 97 400 78 95

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 25-17 - 100 18 50 200 45 88 300 75 69 400 73 93 Compositions exhibiting herbicidal effectiveness greater than that provided by commercial standard Formulation J included 25-01 (steareth-20 plus butyl stearate), 25-09 (ceteareth-15) and 25-10 (steareth-20 plus butyl stearate). When loading was increased by addition of colloidal particulate, performance in this test tended to be reduced (compare 25-01 with 25-15 and 25-10 with 25-14).

EXAMPLE 26 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 26a. All are aqueous solution concentrates containing colloidal particulates and were prepared by process (ix).

The compositions of this example all showed acceptable storage stability. The compositions shown as containing colloidal particulate were not storage-stable unless the colloidal particulate was included as shown.

Table 26a Conc. Glyphosate % w/w m Type of Type of Other comp. g a.e./l Surfactant Aerosil Other surfactant Aerosil component 26-01 488 3.0 1.5 steareth-20 MOX-80/380 (1:2) 26-02 488 4.5 1.5 steareth-20 380 26-03 488 4.5 1.5 steareth-20 MOX-80/380 (1:2) 26-04 488 4.5 1.5 steareth-20 MOX-80/MOX-l70 (1:2) 26-05 488 6.0 1.5 4.12 steareth-20 380 glycerin 26-06 488 3.0 1.5 steareth-20 380 26-07 488 3.0 1.5 7.12 oleth-20 380 propylene glycol 26-08 488 3.0 1.5 oleth-20 MOX-80/380 (1:2) 26-09 488 4.5 1.5 oleth-20 380 26-10 488 4.5 1.5 oleth-20 MOX-80/380(1:2) Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 21 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 20 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 26b. Results for the 400 g a.e./ha glyphosate rate were erratic in this test and should be disregarded. Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 0 25 200 35 27 300 48 28 400 47 48 Formulation J 100 50 75 200 80 90 300 97 96 400 99 98 26-01 10 53 33 200 83 52 300 98 72 400 98 79 26-02 100 43 27 200 80 57 300 87 73 400 96 78 26-03 100 48 30 200 81 70 300 98 78 400 63 57 26-04 100 45 32 200 87 75 300 97 73 400 98 83 26-05 100 38 27 200 37 23 300 45 32 400 35 18 26-06 100 42 40 200 78 52 300 91 72 400 96 80 26-07 100 37 43 200 48 32 300 73 58 400 55 28 26-08 100 43 37 200 68 57 300 84 62 400 89 82 26-09 100 37 32 200 83 67 300 94 82 400 63 48

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.eiha ABUTH ECHCF 26-10 100 32 40 200 75 68 300 90 88 400 65 63 Several high-load (488 g a.e./l) glyphosate compositions exhibited herbicidal effectiveness on ABUTH equal to commercial standard Formulation J, but none was equal to Formulation J on ECHCF in this test.

EXAMPLE 27 Storage stable dry granular concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 27a. The following procedure was used to prepare the compositions. Ammonium glyphosate powder was added to a blender. Excipient ingredients were slowly added, together with sufficient water to wet the powder and form a stiff dough. The blender was operated for sufficient time to thoroughly mix all ingredients. The dough was then transferred to extrusion apparatus and was extruded to form granules, which were finally dried in a fluid bed dryer.

Lecithin for compositions 27-05 and 27-06 was soybean lecithin containing 45% phospholipid, from Avanti.

Table 27a Conc. % w/w Type of Type of comp. Glyphosate Lecithin Butyl Surfactant Colloidal surfactant colloidal particulate a.e. stearate particulate 27-01 68.7 21.0 I steareth-20 27-02 66.0 2.2 C 22.0 | steareth-20 27-03 66.1 24.0 oleth-20 27-04 66.0 2.2 22.0 oleth-20 27-05 67.9 10.0 2.0 10.0 MON 0818 27-06 59.2 10.0 20.0 + 2.0 FC-754 + MON 0818 27-07 68.0 21.0 0.8 tallowamine 20EO Aerosil 90 27-08 68.0 21.0 0.8 tallowamine 20EO Aluminum oxide C 27-09 66.1 24.0 ceteth-20 27-10 66.0 2.2 22.0 ceteth-20 27-11 71.2 16.1 2.0 ceteth-20 Aerosil 380 27-12 71.1 16.3 1.0 ceteth-20 Aerosil blend (*) 27-13 71.2 16.1 2.0 steareth-20 Aerosil 380 27-14 71.2 16.1 1.0 steareth-20 Aerosil blend (*) 27-1 5 68.0 20.0 1.9 oleth-20 Aerosil-380 27-16 70.8 16.6 1.0 oleth-20 Aerosil blend (*) (*) Aerosil MOX-80 + Aerosil MOX-170 (1:1) Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray

compositions were made 21 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 20 days after application.

Formulations J and K were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 27b.

Table 27b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation J 100 52 80 200 90 96 300 96 100 400 97 99 Formulation K 100 33 70 200 67 93 300 83 99 400 93 100 27-01 100 47 60 200 87 98 300 97 98 400 100 98 27-02 100 47 63 200 80 94 300 90 99 400 98 100 27-03 100 62 62 200 83 93 300 97 96 400 97 100 27-04 100 47 57 200 78 94 300 87 100 400 98 100 27-05 100 25 53 200 60 88 300 80 97 400 83 98 27-06 100 35 37 200 65 62 300 83 83 400 90 95 27-07 100 63 55 200 72 97 300 83 100 400 94 100 27-08 100 30 65 200 72 94 300 87 100 400 92 99

concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 27-09 100 37 63 200 77 83 300 88 99 400 97 99 27-10 100 40 55 200 83 93 300 94 96 400 98 99 27-11 100 42 55 200 78 94 300 88 92 400 94 99 27-12 100 38 58 200 78 97 300 92 97 400 95 100 27-13 100 25 50 200 80 88 300 96 95 400 98 98 27-14 100 50 53 200 88 92 300 98 99 400 99 99 27-15 100 33 57 200 75 91 300 94 97 400 98 99 27-16 100 33 55 200 77 90 300 88 99 400 96 100 Several dry granular compositions of this Example outperformed commercial standard composition K, at least on ABUTH. They included 27-11 to 27-16, all containing an alkylether surfactant (steareth-20, oleth-20 or ceteth-20) and colloidal particulate.

EXAMPLE 28 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 28a. Concentrate compositions 28-04 and 28-05 are aqueous solution concentrates and were prepared by process (viii). Concentrate compositions 28-06 to 28-13 are aqueous solution concentrates containing colloidal particulates and were prepared by process (ix). Concentrate compositions 28-01 to 28-03 contain colloidal particulate but no surfactant.

The compositions of this example containing colloidal particulate all showed acceptable storage

stability. Of those containing steareth-20 but no colloidal particulate, composition 28-04 was acceptable storage-stable but composition 28-05 was not.

Table 28a Conc. Glyphosate % w/w Type of comp. g a.e./l steareth-20 I oleth-20 Aerosil Aerosil 28-01 484 | 1.5 MOX-80 28-02 484 1.5 380 28-03 484 1.5 MOX-80/MOX-170(1:1) 28-04 484 1.5 none 28-05 484 3.0 none 28-06 484 3.0 1.5 MOX-170 28-07 484 3.0 1.5 380 28-08 484 3.0 1.5 ~ MOX-80/380 (1:1) 28-09 484 3.0 1.5 MOX-80/MOX-170 (1:1) 28-10 484 3.0 1.5 MOX-80 28-11 484 3.0 1.5 MOX-170 28-12 484 3.0 1.5 380 28-13 484 3.0 1.5 MOX-80/380(1:1) Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 20 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 19 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 28b.

Table 28b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 3 38 200 28 63 300 37 75 400 55 78 Formulation J 100 23 73 200 43 92 300 67 96 400 92 97 28-01 100 23 60 200 40 77 300 65 91 400 75 92 28-02 100 18 50 200 25 53 300 33 75 400 67 82 Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 28-03 100 27 57 200 35 72 300 50 86 400 70 93 28-04 100 42 67 200 48 78 300 78 82 400 80 85 28-05 100 28 43 200 45 77 300 70 92 400 80 95 28-06 100 42 57 200 70 75 300 89 87 400 94 94 28-07 100 43 68 200 62 90 300 88 92 400 97 92 28-08 100 53 57 200 72 87 300 88 94 400 92 97 28-09 100 27 60 200 62 75 300 75 92 400 83 90 28-10 100 47 43 200 73 73 300 82 88 400 97 93 28-11 100 48 57 200 63 75 300 80 91 400 89 98 28-12 100 30 40 200 42 63 300 68 75 400 73 83 28-13 100 37 40 200 57 75 300 73 80 400 78 94 Remarkably strong herbicidal effectiveness was provided by composition 28-05, in spite of its very low surfactant (steareth-20) to glyphosate a.e. ratio of about 1:13. Activity, at least on ABUTH,

was further improved to a significant degree by inclusion in the composition of colloidal particulates such as Aerosil MOX-170 (28-06), Aerosil 380 (28-07), a blend of Aerosil MOX-80 and Aerosil 380 (28-08), and a blend of Aerosil MOX-80 and Aerosil MOX-170 (28-09).

EXAMPLE 29 Aqueous and dry granular concentrate compositions were prepared as shown in Table 29a. Dry granular concentrate compositions 29-01 to 29-11 contain glyphosate ammonium salt, and were prepared by the process described in Example 27.

Aqueous concentrate compositions 29-12 to 29-16 contain glyphosate IPA salt and were prepared by process (v), using soybean lecithin (45% phospholipid, Avanti).

Table 29a Conc. Glyphos- w/w Type of Type of comp. ate Glyphos- Lecithin Butyl Surfactant Colloidal surfactant colloidal g a.e./l ate a.e. stearate particulate | particulate 29-01 68.7 21.0 steareth-20 29-02 66.1 24.0 oleth-20 29-03 67.9 9 10.0 2.0 10.0 MON 0818 29-04 59.2 10.0 20.0 + 2.0 FC-754 + MON 0818 29-05 66.1 24.0 ceteth-20 29-06 71.2 16.1 2.0 steareth-20 Aerosil 380 29-07 71.2 16.1 2.0 steareth-20 Aerosil blend 29-08 68.0 20.0 1.9 oleth-20 Aerosil 380 29-09 63.5 25.0 2.0 steareth-20 Aerosil blend 29-10 67.9 20.0 2.0 steareth-20 Aerosil blend 29-11 72.2 15.0 2.0 steareth-20 Aerosil blend 29-12 370 4.7 4.7 steareth-20 29-13 350 4.9 4.9 ceteareth-27 29-14 348 5.0 5.0 ceteareth-15 29-15 348 5.0 5.0 oleth-20 29-16 351 4.4 5.0 steareth-30 Aerosil blend: Aerosil MOX-80 + Aerosil MOX-170 (1:1) Velvetleaf(Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 20 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 16 days after application.

Formulations J and K were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 29b. Table 29b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation J 100 0 20 200 28 57 300 58 96 400 73 99 Formulation K 100 22 13 200 42 83 300 48 91 400 58 95 29-01 100 28 30 200 48 80 300 80 97 400 85 99 29-02 100 43 52 200 68 80 300 72 88 400 86 94 29-03 100 23 37 200 50 83 300 75 88 400 85 96 29-04 100 50 45 200 73 80 300 85 92 400 95 94 29-05 100 18 45 200 65 83 300 87 95 400 94 86 29-06 100 47 50 200 62 68 300 82 94 400 91 87 29-07 100 50 47 200 60 78 300 87 87 400 93 93 29-08 100 30 55 200 55 77 300 82 85 400 88 97 29-09 100 45 50 200 57 78 300 83 83 400 84 89

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 29-10 100 42 50 200 57 80 300 73 91 400 91 90 29-11 100 28 48 200 50 75 300 70 87 400 82 89 29-12 100 20 40 200 63 80 300 67 96 400 80 88 29-13 100 27 35 200 50 85 300 77 90 400 84 86 29-14 100 27 25 200 40 70 300 68 94 400 89 91 29-15 100 17 20 200 47 82 300 58 89 400 91 95 29-16 100 22 20 200 41 80 300 84 89 400 99 98 All dry compositions of the invention in this study exhibited greater herbicidal effectiveness on both ABUTH and ECHCF, in some cases by a very substantial margin, than commercial standard Formulation K.

EXAMPLE 30 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 30a. All contain colloidal particulates and were prepared by process (ix).

The compositions of this example all showed acceptable storage stability. The compositions shown as containing colloidal particulate were not storage-stable unless the colloidal particulate was included as shown.

Table 30a Concentrate Glyphosate % w/w Type of Type of composition g a.e./l Oil Surfactant Aerosil oil surfactant 380 30-01 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 butyl stearate oleth-20 30-02 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 stearylamine oleth-20

Concentrate Glyphosate °/O w/w Type of Type of composition g a.e./l Oil Surfactant Aerosil oil surfactant 380 30-03 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 stearyl alcohol oleth-20 30-04 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 docosane oleth-20 30-05 360 10.0 1.25 none oleth-20 30-06 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 butyl stearate steareth-30 30-07 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 stearylamine steareth-30 30-08 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 stearyl alcohol steareth-30 30-09 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 docosane steareth-30 30-10 360 10.0 1.25 none steareth-30 30-11 360 5.0 + 5.0 1.25 none oleth-20 + steareth-20 30-12 360 5.0 + 5.0 1.25 none oleth-20 + steareth-30 30-13 360 5.0 + 5.0 1.25 none oleth-20 + ceteareth-27 30-14 360 5.0 + 5.0 1.25 none oleth-20 + ceteareth-15 30-15 360 5.0 + 5.0 1.25 none steareth-30 + steareth-20 30-16 360 5.0 + 5.0 1.25 none steareth-30 + ceteareth-27 30-17 360 5.0 + 5.0 1.25 none steareth-30 + ceteareth-15 30-18 360 10.0 1.25 none laureth-23 Velvetleaf(Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 17 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 19 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 30b.

Table 30b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 0 60 200 15 73 300 33 88 400 57 91 Formulation J 100 5 70 200 37 92 300 80 99 400 77 96 30-01 100 13 88 200 32 85 300 48 98 400 90 93 30-02 100 10 70 200 45 98 300 72 99 400 80 98 Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 30-03 100 3 77 200 25 94 300 47 98 400 75 99 30-04 100 7 67 200 23 94 300 40 99 400 7 47 30-05 100 7 76 200 25 88 300 45 96 400 75 97 30-06 100 12 96 200 30 97 300 45 98 400 15 60 30-07 100 8 83 200 12 97 300 35 94 400 50 98 30-08 100 15 72 200 30 88 300 40 99 400 0 33 30-09 100 5 73 200 15 94 300 47 99 400 5 53 30-10 100 7 79 200 15 95 300 45 98 400 62 99 30-11 100 5 84 200 13 98 300 30 98 400 55 100 30-12 100 3 95 200 17 99 300 28 99 400 67 100 30-13 100 5 90 200 17 99 300 30 100 400 60 98 30-14 100 3 98 200 25 97 300 38 100 400 57 100

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 30-15 100 5 97 200 25 97 300 40 100 400 40 99 30-16 100 10 97 200 15 98 300 52 100 400 0 47 30-17 100 7 97 200 25 94 300 40 98 400 33 97 30-18 100 7 96 200 25 99 300 55 100 400 73 100 Percent inhibition data for the 400 g a.e./ha glyphosate rate in this test are unreliable and should be ignored. In presence of colloidal particulate, neither oleth-20 (composition 30-05) nor steareth-20 (30-10) provided herbicidal effectiveness equal to Formulation J in this study, and no great or consistent further enhancement was obtained by adding butyl stearate.

EXAMPLE 31 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 3 1 a. The process for preparing these aqueous concentrate compositions was generally as described above except that different mixing methods were used as the final step of the process as shown in the footnote to Table 3 lea.

The compositions of this example all showed acceptable storage stability. The compositions shown as containing colloidal particulate were not storage-stable unless the colloidal particulate was included as shown.

Table 31a Concentrate | Glyphosate % w/w Type of I Process composition g a.ejl Butyl stearate Surfactant Aerosil 380 surfactant (*) 31-01 1 163 0.5 5.0 0 oleth-20 31-02 ~ 163 0.5 5.0 steareth-20 31-03 163 0.5 5.0 ceteareth-27 31-04 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 ceteareth-15 A 31-05 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 ceteth-20 A 31-06 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 steareth-20 A 31-07 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 oleth-20 A 31-08 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 ceteareth-27 A 31-09 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 steareth-30 A 31-10 360 10.0 1.25 steareth-30 A

Concentrate Glyphosate % w/w Type of Process composition g a.e./1 Butyl stearate Surfactant Aerosil 380 surfactant (*) 31-11 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 oleth-20 A 31-12 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 oleth-20 B 31-13 360 1.0 ~ 10.0 1.25 oleth-20 C 31-14 360 1.0 0 10.0 1.25 oleth-20 D 31-15 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 oleth-20 E 31-16 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 oleth-20 F 31-17 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 oleth-20 G 31-18 360 1.0 10.0 1.25 oleth-20 A (*) Process: A Silverson mixer, medium screen, 3 minutes at 7000 rpm B Silverson mixer, coarse screen, 3 minutes at 7000 rpm C Fann mixer, 50% output, 5 minutes D Turrax mixer, 3 minutes at 8000 rpm E Overhead stirrer, low speed F Overhead stirrer, high speed G Hand shaking, 3 minutes Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinoch loa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 17 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 19 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 31 b.

Table 31b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 20 40 200 45 50 300 65 72 400 78 85 Formulation J 100 43 53 200 80 80 300 96 82 400 99 94 31-01 100 45 57 200 80 72 300 89 78 400 98 83 31-02 100 53 57 200 80 78 300 89 77 400 93 83 Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 31-03 100 45 60 200 83 75 300 97 73 400 97 85 31-04 100 45 45 200 80 80 300 83 83 400 95 95 31-05 100 42 42 200 77 77 300 93 93 400 98 98 31-06 100 30 30 200 42 42 300 27 30 400 3 20 31-07 100 40 40 200 77 75 300 90 93 400 97 86 31-08 100 43 50 200 80 80 300 92 93 400 96 98 31-09 100 0 2 200 82 75 300 83 96 400 90 88 31-10 100 57 60 200 80 70 300 88 88 400 95 93 31-11 100 35 47 200 72 75 300 80 75 400 85 77 31-12 100 47 47 200 72 77 300 80 90 400 86 78 31-13 100 55 50 200 75 83 300 78 92 400 91 92 31-14 100 52 50 200 75 78 300 83 88 400 99 92

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 31-15 100 47 47 200 70 73 300 87 87 400 75 63 31-16 100 43 40 200 78 75 300 88 88 400 87 91 31-17 100 43 43 200 67 88 300 80 75 400 92 83 31-18 100 27 40 200 63 57 300 82 73 400 87 70 Results obtained with composition 31-06 are out of line with other data in this Example and an error in formulation or application is suspected. Some differences in herbicidal effectiveness were evident when a composition containing 360 g a.e./l glyphosate, 1% butyl stearate, 10% oleth-20 and 1.25% Aerosil 380 was processed in different ways (31-11 to 31-17). However, as compositions 31-07 and 31-11 were identically processed yet differed in effectiveness, no firm conclusions can be drawn from this test.

EXAMPLE 32 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 32a. Concentrate compositions 32-01 to 104-09 are aqueous solution concentrates and were prepared by process (viii). Concentrate compositions 32-10 to 32-18 are aqueous solution concentrates containing colloidal particulates and were prepared by process (ix).

Compositions of this example containing 3% or 6% surfactant were not acceptably storage-stable except in the presence of colloidal particulate as shown.

Table 32a Conc. Glyphosate %w/w Type of comp. g a.e./l steareth-20 oleth-20 Velvetex | Aerosil Aerosil AB-45 32-01 488 1.0 none 32-02 488 3.0 none 32-03 488 6.0 none 32-04 488 1.0 none 32-05 488 3.0 none 32-06 488 6.0 none 32-07 488 1.0 none 32-08 488 3.0 none Conc. Glyphosate % w/w Type of comp. g a.e./l steareth-20 oleth-20 Velvetex Aerosil Aerosil AB-45 32-09 488 4.6 none 32-10 488 1.0 1.5 MOX-80/MOX-170(1:1) 32-11 488 3.0 1.5 MOX-80/MOX-170 (1:1) 32-12 488 6.0 1.5 MOX-80/MOX-170 (1:1) 32-13 488 1.0 1.5 MOX-80/MOX-170(1:1) 32-14 488 3.0 1.5 MOX-80/MOX-170(1:1) 32-15 488 6.0 1.5 MOX-80/MOX-170(1:1) 32-16 488 1.0 1.5 MOX-80/MOX-170(1:1) 32-17 488 3.0 1.5 MOX-80/MOX-170(1:1) 32-18 488 4.6 1.5 ~ MOX-80/MOX-170 (1:1)

Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 18 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 18 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 32b.

Table 32b Composition applied Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 10 40 200 38 67 300 70 80 400 86 92 Formulation J 100 43 58 200 65 82 300 91 94 400 100 95 32-01 100 23 60 200 40 65 300 73 87 400 80 92 32-02 100 38 67 200 77 82 300 95 83 400 99 93 32-03 100 33 67 200 78 73 300 90 94 400 100 96 32-04 100 23 63 200 48 81 300 68 87 400 72 88 100 Composition applied Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 32-05 100 30 63 200 63 80 300 78 89 400 95 93 32-06 100 25 85 200 68 93 300 77 93 400 99 95 32-07 100 13 60 200 42 80 300 57 95 400 92 96 32-08 100 20 73 200 43 92 300 83 93 400 72 96 32-09 100 30 73 200 50 94 300 65 96 400 75 98 32-10 100 10 65 200 53 88 300 72 94 400 83 95 32-11 100 15 50 200 57 77 300 82 95 400 92 97 32-12 100 30 70 200 68 98 300 78 97 400 96 98 32-13 100 15 77 200 43 93 300 68 95 400 77 99 32-14 100 10 73 200 40 93 300 68 98 400 78 98 32-15 100 missing missing 200 missing missing 300 missing missing 400 missing missing 32-16 100 0 60 200 30 93 300 40 99 400 50 99

Composition applied Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH I ECHCF 32-17 100 2 83 200 43 99 300 67 100 400 67 100 32-18 100 5 95 200 37 100 300 60 100 400 78 100 In high-load (488 g a.e./l) glyphosate compositions, steareth-20 at 3% or 6% provided greater herbicidal effectiveness in this test than the same concentrations of oleth-20. Even at just 3%, steareth- 20 (composition 32-02) gave effectiveness equal to commercial standard Formulation J. Addition of a blend of colloidal particulates to stabilize the composition (32-1 1) slightly reduced effectiveness in this study.

EXAMPLE 33 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 33a. Concentrate compositions 33-01 to 33-04 are aqueous solution concentrates and were prepared by process (viii). Concentrate compositions 33-08 to 33-18 are aqueous solution concentrates containing colloidal particulates and were prepared by process (ix). Concentrate compositions 33-05 to 33-07 contain colloidal particulate but no surfactant.

All compositions ofthis example except 33-01 to 33-03 were acceptably storage-stable.

Table 33a Concentrate Glyphosate % w/w Type of composition g a.e./l steareth- steareth- MON Aerosil Aerosil 20 100 0818 33-01 488 3.0 33-02 488 4.5 33-03 488 6.0 33-04 488 3.0 33-05 488 1.5 380 33-06 488 I .5 1.5 MOX-80/MOX-170(l:1) 33-07 488 3.0 MOX-80/380(1:1) 33-08 488 1.5 33-09 488 3.0 3.0 1.5 380 33-10 488 4.5 3.0 1.5 380 33-11 488 6.0 3.0 1.5 380 33-12 488 3.0 3.0 1.5 MOX-80/MOX-170(1:1) 33-13 488 4.5 3.0 1.5 MOX-80/MOX-170(1:1) 33-14 488 6.0 3.0 1.5 MOX-80/MOX-170(1:1) 33-15 488 3.0 3.0 1.5 MOX-80/380(1:1) 33-16 488 4.5 3.0 1.5 MOX-80/380 (1:1) 33-17 488 6.0 3.0 1.5 MOX-80/380(1:1) 33-18 488 4.5 3.0 1.5 MOX-80/MOX-170(1:l)

Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 16 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 21 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 33b.

Table 33b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 2 23 200 18 50 300 42 67 400 63 80 Formulation J 100 20 47 200 40 86 300 83 98 400 93 98 33-01 100 10 75 200 62 83 300 80 96 400 93 99 33-02 100 40 60 200 77 92 300 87 97 400 93 99 33-03 100 23 40 200 38 63 300 78 91 400 97 91 33-04 100 20 38 200 23 77 300 43 94 400 73 94 33-05 100 7 30 200 25 37 300 42 60 400 67 63 33-06 100 7 30 200 20 53 300 52 67 400 83 67 33-07 100 5 35 200 20 63 300 57 80 400 43 85 Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 33-08 100 22 83 200 47 99 300 86 98 400 78 100 33-09 100 12 45 200 25 77 300 40 83 400 37 95 33-10 100 13 53 200 73 99 300 85 98 400 99 99 33-11 100 25 50 200 60 88 300 93 99 400 99 99 33-12 100 25 45 200 57 88 300 85 97 400 100 94 33-13 100 30 52 200 68 87 300 93 99 400 100 92 33-14 100 40 45 200 73 88 300 81 98 400 100 99 33-15 100 8 57 200 33 96 300 81 99 400 95 99 33-16 100 10 62 200 48 83 300 99 98 400 100 100 33-17 100 27 58 200 65 92 300 75 98 400 93 99 33-18 100 5 40 200 33 87 300 55 98 400 75 98 Among stabilized high-load (488 g a.e./l) glyphosate compositions providing herbicidal effectiveness superior to commercial standard Formulation J, at least on ABUTH, were 33-10 and 33-11

(respectively 4.5% and 6% steareth-20 + 3% MON 0818 + 1.5% Aerosil 380), 33-13 (4.5% steareth-20 + 3% MON 0818 + 1.5% Aerosil MOX-80/MOX-170 blend) and 33-16 (4.5% steareth-20 + 3% MON 0818 + 1.5% Aerosil MOX-80/380 blend). The relatively poor performance of composition 33-04 and the good performance of composition 33-02 shows that the excellent results obtained with the stabilized compositions listed above are primarily attributable to the steareth-20 component.

EXAMPLE 34 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 34a. Concentrate compositions 34-01 to 34-09 are aqueous solution concentrates and were prepared by process (viii). Concentrate compositions 34-10 to 34-18 are aqueous solution concentrates containing colloidal particulates and were prepared by process (ix).

Compositions of this example containing 3% or 6% surfactant were not acceptably storage-stable except in the presence of colloidal particulate as shown.

Table 34a Concentrate Glyphosate % w/w Type of composition g a.e./l steareth-20 oleth-20 Velvetex Aerosil Aerosil AB-45 34-01 488 1.5 none 34-02 488 3.0 none 34-03 488 6.0 1 none 34-04 488 1.5 none 34-05 488 1 3.0 none 34-06 488 6.0 none 34-07 488 1.5 none 34-08 488 3.0 none 34-09 488 4.5 none 34-10 488 1.5 1.5 MOX-80/380 (1:1) 34-11 488 3.0 1.5 MOX-80/380(1:1) 34-12 488 6.0 1.5 MOX-80/380(1:1) 34-13 488 1.5 1.5 MOX-80/380(l:1) 34-14 488 3.0 1.5 MOX-80/380(1:1) 34-15 488 6.0 1.5 MOX-80/380(1:1) 34-16 488 1.5 1.5 MOX-80/380(1:1) 34-17 488 3.0 1.5 MOX-80/380(1:1) 34-18 488 4.5 1.5 MOX-80/380(1:1) Velvetleaf(Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 15 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 22 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 34b.

Table34b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 0 10 200 3 27 300 13 30 400 33 40 Formulation J 100 2 53 200 30 97 300 70 99 400 80 99 34-01 100 5 67 200 30 89 300 58 98 400 80 100 34-02 100 20 60 200 45 90 300 78 99 400 80 100 34-03 100 20 57 200 47 93 300 78 96 400 83 98 34-04 100 3 57 200 30 83 300 63 99 400 82 98 34-05 100 5 53 200 27 83 300 47 98 400 77 100 34-06 100 5 40 200 23 70 300 47 92 400 77 99 34-07 100 3 53 200 30 85 300 60 94 400 72 97 34-08 100 3 50 200 22 88 300 53 97 400 80 100 34-09 100 0 40 200 20 83 300 40 99 400 67 99

Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 34-10 100 0 40 200 27 60 300 47 83 400 78 94 34-11 100 5 47 200 25 77 300 57 96 400 87 97 34-12 100 15 43 200 52 88 300 87 98 400 87 98 34-13 100 0 40 200 17 70 300 35 83 400 53 88 34-14 100 0 33 200 18 67 300 28 90 400 62 98 34-15 100 2 33 200 25 70 300 53 85 400 72 97 34-16 100 0 30 200 17 50 300 27 67 400 72 87 34-17 100 0 0 200 7 63 300 32 88 400 47 90 34-18 100 0 5 200 12 60 300 25 83 400 45 97 Compositions containing steareth-20 generally performed better than counterparts containing oleth-20 in this study, both in the presence and in the absence of colloidal particulates.

EXAMPLE 35 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 35a. All contain colloidal particulates and were prepared by process (ix).

The compositions of this example all showed acceptable storage stability. The compositions shown as containing colloidal particulate were not storage-stable unless the colloidal particulate was

included as shown.

Table 35a Concentrate % w/w 7 Type of Type of composition Glyphosate Oil | Surfactant | Aerosil 380 oil surfactant a.e. 35-01 31 1.0 10.0 1.25 Butyl stearate steareth-20 35-02 31 1.0 10.0 1.25 Butyl stearate oleth-20 35-03 31 1.0 10.0 1.25 Butyl stearate steareth-30 35-04 31 10.0 1.25 none steareth-30 Velvetleaf(Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 16 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 22 days after application. The treatments of this Example were applied at four different times within the same day.

Formulation J was applied as a comparative treatment. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 35b.

Table 35b Concentrate composition Hour when Glyphosate rate % Inhibition applied g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation J 1000 100 5 33 200 42 75 300 67 83 400 77 93 35-01 1000 100 7 33 200 40 70 300 50 82 400 78 91 35-02 1000 100 18 33 200 37 73 300 48 91 400 80 92 35-03 1000 100 30 33 200 40 75 300 82 85 400 83 80 35-04 1000 100 30 30 200 43 78 300 78 92 400 93 95 Formulation J 1200 100 5 38 200 35 87 300 53 96 400 88 99 Concentrate composition Hour when Glyphosate rate % Inhibition applied g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 35-01 1200 100 10 30 200 47 91 300 70 89 400 78 97 35-02 1200 100 5 37 200 40 75 300 48 87 400 70 94 35-03 1200 100 20 37 200 50 82 300 78 98 400 83 97 35-04 1200 100 33 33 200 45 93 300 75 98 400 95 100 Formulation J 1400 100 15 40 200 30 90 300 55 100 400 80 100 35-01 1400 100 17 40 200 45 70 300 75 97 400 80 98 35-02 1400 100 17 47 200 35 83 300 67 97 400 63 97 35-03 1400 100 30 40 200 63 80 300 77 97 400 78 100 35-04 1400 100 23 40 200 45 87 300 73 100 400 78 100 Formulation J 1600 100 10 37 200 32 83 300 52 97 400 75 98 35-01 1600 100 27 43 200 40 89 300 77 99 400 95 99 35-02 1600 100 20 53 200 40 95 300 53 98 400 80 98

Concentrate composition | Hour when Glyphosate rate % Inhibition applied g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 35-03 1600 100 27 60 200 60 93 300 78 97 400 96 100 35-04 1600 100 15 37 200 43 83 300 67 97 400 78 96 Composition 35-03 illustrates the consistency of high-level performance obtainable with, in this case, steareth-30 at an approximately 1:3 weight/weight ratio to glyphosate a.e., together with a small amount of butyl stearate and Aerosil 380. An average of percent inhibition of ABUTH across all four glyphosate rates shows the following comparison of35-03 with Formulation J, applied at four different hours of the day: Hour Formulation J Composition 35-03 1000 48 59 1200 45 58 1400 48 62 1600 42 65 EXAMPLE 36 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 36a. Concentrate compositions 36-01 to 36-07 are aqueous solution concentrates and were prepared by process (viii). Concentrate compositions 36-08 to 36-18 are aqueous solution concentrates containing colloidal particulates and were prepared by process (ix).

Compositions 36-01 to 36-06 were not acceptably storage-stable. All other compositions showed acceptable storage stability.

Table 36a Concentrate Glyphosate %w/w composition g a.e./l steareth-30 steareth-20 Agrimul Aerosil 380 PG-2069 36-01 488 3.00 36-02 488 4.50 36-03 488 6.00 36-04 488 3.00 36-05 488 4.50 36-06 488 6.00 36-07 488 2.0 36-08 488 3.00 1.5 36-09 488 4.50 T, 1.5 36-10 488 6.00 1.5 36-11 488 3.00 1.5

Concentrate Glyphosate % w/w composition g a.e./l steareth-30 steareth-20 r Agrimul Aerosil 380 PG-2069 36-12 488 4.50 1.5 36-13 488 6.00 1.5 36-14 488 1.50 1.50 1.5 36-15 r 488 2.25 2.25 1.5 36-16 488 3.00 3.00 1.5 36-17 488 2.25 2.25 2.0 1.5 36-18 488 3.00 3.00 2.0 1.5 Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 16 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 23 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 36b.

Table 36b Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 2 20 200 22 33 300 35 67 400 68 73 Formulation J 100 32 63 200 78 90 300 83 93 400 92 97 36-01 100 38 57 200 50 63 300 62 80 400 75 89 36-02 100 20 57 200 63 70 300 75 88 400 80 96 36-03 100 47 53 200 72 80 300 87 96 400 100 99 36-04 100 33 30 200 48 60 300 75 73 400 90 83 Concentrate composition Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 36-05 100 10 30 200 43 50 300 68 82 400 83 92 36-06 100 22 40 200 43 50 300 75 83 400 83 87 36-07 100 10 37 200 40 63 300 78 86 400 95 96 36-08 100 23 43 200 68 63 300 92 88 400 98 93 36-09 100 47 57 200 78 70 300 95 92 400 100 96 36-10 100 37 57 200 85 68 300 92 85 400 100 93 36-11 100 28 43 200 63 73 300 85 83 400 95 96 36-12 100 40 53 200 75 88 300 90 92 400 100 97 36-13 100 40 53 200 75 75 300 99 92 400 100 98 36-14 100 30 43 200 68 72 300 83 82 400 96 97 36-15 100 38 47 200 77 72 300 94 92 400 100 96 36-16 100 33 43 200 75 67 300 92 88 400 100 94

Concentrate composition c Glyphosate rate I % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH | ECHCF 36-17 100 25 43 200 68 82 300 78 96 400 99 96 36-18 100 13 37 200 72 70 300 87 80 400 99 85 Several stabilized high-load (488 g a.e./l) glyphosate compositions of this Example provided herbicidal effectiveness equal or superior, at least on ABUTH, to that obtained with commercial standard Formulation J.

EXAMPLE 37 Aqueous concentrate compositions were prepared containing glyphosate IPA salt and excipient ingredients as shown in Table 37a. Concentrate compositions 37-12 to 37-14 are aqueous solution concentrates and were prepared by process (viii).

Table 37a Concentrate Glyphosate %w/w Type of composition g a.e./l steareth- Ethomeen Propylene Aerosil Aerosil 20 T/25 glycol 37-01 488 3.0 0.8 380 37-02 488 6.0 1.5 MOX-80/MOX-170 (1:1) 37-03 488 4.5 1.5 380 37-04 488 4.5 2.25 0.5 1.5 MOX-80/380 (1:2) 37-05 488 4.5 0.5 1.5 MOX-80/380 (1:2) 37-06 488 6.0 0.5 1.5 MOX-80/380 (1:2) 37-07 488 3.0 1.50 0.5 1.5 MOX-80/380 (1:2) 37-08 488 6.0 3.00 0.5 1.5 MOX-80/380 (1:2) 37-09 488 3.0 1.50 0.5 1.5 380 37-10 488 4.5 2.25 0.5 1.5 380 37-11 488 6.0 3.00 0.5 1.5 380 37-12 488 1.50 0.5 none 37-13 488 2.25 0.5 none 37-14 488 3.00 0.5 none 37-15 488 1.50 0.5 1.5 MOX-80/380 (1:2) 37-16 488 2.25 0.5 1.5 MOX-80/380 (1:2) 37-17 488 3.00 0.5 ~ 1.5 MOX-80/380 (1:2) Velvetleaf(Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and Japanese millet (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCF) plants were grown and treated by the standard procedures given above. Applications of spray compositions were made 16 days after planting ABUTH and ECHCF, and evaluation of herbicidal inhibition was done 20 days after application.

Formulations B and J were applied as comparative treatments. Results, averaged for all replicates of each treatment, are shown in Table 37b.

Table 37b Composition applied Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF Formulation B 100 0 3 200 10 12 300 43 22 400 47 27 Formulation J 100 13 15 200 25 22 300 58 53 400 68 82 37-01 100 30 20 200 60 53 300 73 88 400 87 96 37-02 100 40 23 200 63 55 300 88 87 400 93 93 37-03 100 42 20 200 72 55 300 82 83 400 90 88 37-04 100 60 32 200 70 57 300 90 88 400 90 93 37-05 100 47 32 200 67 57 300 88 85 400 94 88 37-06 100 33 37 200 68 67 300 82 80 400 90 88 37-07 100 35 37 200 67 70 300 87 85 400 97 93 37-08 100 32 35 200 67 77 300 85 92 400 97 95 37-09 100 27 33 200 57 67 300 88 83 400 93 95

Composition applied Glyphosate rate % Inhibition g a.e./ha ABUTH ECHCF 37-10 100 13 33 200 62 58 300 80 80 400 92 92 37-11 100 13 20 200 60 57 300 88 63 400 93 82 37-12 100 10 27 200 53 53 300 70 67 400 88 85 37-13 100 3 28 200 50 57 300 67 70 400 90 82 37-14 100 3 28 200 55 57 300 70 83 400 87 87 37-15 100 10 20 200 58 43 300 70 72 400 83 85 37-16 100 12 22 200 55 57 300 73 77 400 92 90 37-17 100 7 20 200 53 55 300 70 75 400 85 88 Several stabilized high-load (488 g a.e./l) glyphosate compositions of this Example provided herbicidal effectiveness equal or superior, at least on ABUTH, to that obtained with commercial standard Formulation J.

The preceding description of specific embodiments of the present invention is not intended to be a complete list of every possible embodiment of the invention. Persons skilled in this field will recognize that modifications can be made to the specific embodiments described here that would be within the scope of the present invention.