AU2018204615A1

AU2018204615A1 - A granular composition

Info

Publication number: AU2018204615A1
Application number: AU2018204615A
Authority: AU
Inventors: Neil McPhee; Ross Rainbird
Original assignee: Imtrade Australia Pty Ltd
Current assignee: Imtrade Australia Pty Ltd
Priority date: 2017-07-05
Filing date: 2018-06-25
Publication date: 2019-01-24
Anticipated expiration: 2038-06-25
Also published as: AU2018204615B2; AU2021105434A4; AU2021105433A4

Abstract

Provided herein is a granular composition for preventing and/or controlling a mollusc and/or insect infestation that includes a molluscicidal agent, an 5 insecticidal agent and a binder. Also provided are methods of using and making such a granular composition.

Description

A GRANULAR COMPOSITION

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

This invention relates to a granular composition. In particular, the invention relates to a granular composition including an insecticidal agent and a molluscicidal agent and a method of using and making same.

BACKGROUND TO THE INVENTION

Terrestrial gastropod molluscs, such as slugs and snails, are capable of causing extensive damage to agricultural crops and other plants throughout many parts of the world. To this end, snails and slugs typically thrive in the same type of moist, temperate conditions in which many agricultural products are cultivated and their damaging effects on agricultural crops and the like can be quite significant given their ability to consume their own weight in food in a matter of days.

Similar to molluscs, insects, such as grasshoppers, locusts, earwigs, crickets, millipedes, slaters and cockroaches, can also cause significant damage to, for example, a wide range of agricultural and horticultural crops and plants.

One method known in the art to reduce the mollusc or insect population in a given area is to distribute pellets composed of a molluscicide or insecticide respectively together with an inert carrier or other filler material. Nonetheless, there remains a need for a granular composition that provides for the control of a broad range of insects and molluscs in the same

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 environmental setting. Additionally, there is a need for such a granular composition to overcome one or more of the inherent limitations of commercially available insecticide or molluscicide formulations, such as their lack of or limited resistance to environmental factors, such as rainfall.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

In a first aspect, the invention provides a granular composition for preventing and/or controlling a mollusc and/or insect infestation comprising:

(a) a molluscicidal agent;

(b) an insecticidal agent; and (c) a binder.

In one embodiment, the granular composition further comprises an attractant.

In a second aspect, the invention provides a method for preventing and/or controlling a mollusc and/or insect infestation which includes the step of administering an effective amount of the granular composition of the first aspect to a target area to thereby prevent and/or control the mollusc and/or insect infestation.

In a third aspect, the invention provides a method of preparing a granular composition for the control and/or prevention of a mollusc and/or insect infestation, said method including the steps of:

(a) mixing a molluscicidal agent, an insecticidal agent, a binder and optionally an attractant; and (b) granulating the mixture of step (a);

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 to thereby prepare the granular composition.

In one embodiment, the mixture of step (a) is granulated, at least in part, by extrusion granulation.

Suitably, with respect to the above aspects, the molluscicidal agent is selected from the group consisting of a cyclic ketone, a carbamate, a strobilurin, a metal salt, a metal chelate, a spinosyn mixture, a chloronitrophenol, an organometal, a morpholine, a nereistoxin analogue, a pyridine, a plant-based molluscicide and any combination thereof. Preferably, the molluscicidal agent is selected from the group consisting of a cyclic 10 ketone, a carbamate, a metal salt, a metal chelate and any combination thereof. Even more preferably, the molluscicidal agent is selected from the group consisting of metaldehyde, methiocarb, an iron salt, an iron chelate and any combination thereof.

Referring to the aforementioned aspects, the insecticidal agent is 15 suitably selected from the group consisting of a carbamate, a neonicotinoid, a phenylpyrazole, a pyrethrin, a pyrethroid, a macrocyclic lactone, an organophosphate, a pyrimidinamine insecticide, a pyrrole insecticide, a quaternary ammonium insecticide, a sulfoximine insecticide, a tetramic acid insecticide, a tetronic acid insecticide, an urea insecticide, a zwitterionic 20 insecticide and any combination thereof. Preferably, the insecticidal agent is selected from the group consisting of a neonicotinoid, a phenylpyrazole and any combination thereof. More preferably, the insecticidal agent is selected from the group consisting of fipronil, thiamethoxam, imidacloprid and any combination thereof.

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

In one embodiment of the above aspects, the binder is or comprises calcium stearate and/or polyhydroxymethyl urea.

In regards to the previous aspects, the granular composition is suitably substantially water resistant.

In a fourth aspect, the invention provides a granular composition prepared by the method of third aspect.

As used herein, except where the context requires otherwise, the term “comprise and variations of the term, such as “comprising, “comprises and “comprised, are not intended to exclude further elements, components, integers or steps but may include one or more unstated further elements, components, integers or steps.

It will be appreciated that the indefinite articles “a” and “an are not to be read as singular indefinite articles or as otherwise excluding more than one or more than a single subject to which the indefinite article refers. For example, “a” binder includes one binder, one or more binders and a plurality of binders.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The invention advantageously provides a granular or pelleted composition or formulation for the control of both ground dwelling molluscs and insects typically found together in the same environmental setting. Not only is the application of such a product beneficial with respect to, for example, crop quality and yield, but also results in labour cost and/or equipment cost savings for the grower or farmer and lower environmental

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 emissions. Additionally, there can also be significant cost savings with respect to producing the granular composition of the invention, as there is a potential reduction in: (i) the use of non-active ingredients (e.g., solvents, surfactants, preservatives, anti-oxidants, dyes, consumption deterrents); (ii) product packaging; (iii) handling, storage and/or freight costs; (iv) associated labour costs in, for example, production, packaging, transport and warehousing; (v) regulatory costs; and (vi) disposal costs.

Additionally, the invention preferably provides a granular composition that demonstrates improved resistance to environmental factors, and in particular water by way of rainfall, dew, humidity and the like. As such, the granular composition of the invention advantageously requires less frequent application. This affords further cost savings in respect of, for example, fuel, equipment wear and tear and labour costs.

In one aspect, the invention provides a granular composition for preventing and/or controlling a mollusc and/or insect infestation comprising:

(a) a molluscicidal agent;

(b) an insecticidal agent; and (c) a binder.

Molluscs which may be controlled by the granular composition of the present invention are preferably molluscs of the gastropod class, more preferably the subclass pulmonata, and even more preferably snails and slugs. Insects to be targeted with the present granular composition may include those taken from the orders Coleoptera, Diptera, Hymenoptera, Lepidoptera, Mallophaga, Homoptera, Hemiptera, Orthroptera, Thysanoptera,

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Dermaptera, Isoptera, Anoplura, Siphonaptera, and Trichoptera, such as earwigs, crickets, grasshoppers, locusts, millipedes, slaters and cockroaches. Preferably, the molluscs and insects to be targeted with the granular composition of the invention can be found or located in the same target area, locus or habitat, and in particular a ground-dwelling or associated target area, locus or habitat.

As used herein, the terms granule or “granular” refer to solid pellets, granules, grains and the like. Such granules can include those in which there is no discreet core or coatings (i.e., a granule having a substantially uniform composition throughout) or those having a discreet core and a coating thereover. To this end, the insecticidal agent and/or the molluscicidal agent may comprise the core, the coating or both.

The term molluscicide or molluscicidal agent means an active ingredient or chemical which is intended to prevent, control and/or eradicate a mollusc infestation, including snails, slugs and related organisms. Similarly, the term insecticide or “insecticidal agent” broadly refers to compounds which are capable of preventing, controlling and/or eradicating an insect infestation. These terms not only refer to a toxic effect (e.g., death or destruction of the pest) of the agent, but also, for example, a repelling effect, damage to the pest (i.e., the mollusc and/or insect), inhibition or modulation of pest growth, inhibition of pest reproduction by slowing or arresting its proliferation and any combination thereof.

It will be appreciated that the molluscicidal agent and/or the insecticidal agent may be in the form of a pure active ingredient, a technical grade of the

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 active ingredient, or an active ingredient formulated with one or more agriculturally acceptable carriers.

By agriculturally acceptable carrier is meant any substance which can be used to aid the dispersion of the active ingredient (i.e., the molluscicidal agent and/or the insecticidal agent) without impairing the active ingredient's effectiveness and which by itself has no significant detrimental effect on, for example, the soil, equipment, desirable plants, or the agronomic or agricultural environment. Suitable carriers are preferably solid carriers such as those described in more detail hereinbelow.

In other embodiments, the molluscicidal agent and/or the insecticidal agent is in the form of a prodrug which, when administered to a locus or target area of a mollusc and/or insect infestation or consumed by a target mollusc and/or insect, is converted to a compound capable of exerting a molluscicidal and/or insecticidal effect.

Suitably, the molluscicidal agent for inclusion in the granular composition of the invention may be one or more molluscicidal agents as are known in the art, including derivatives or isomers (e.g., enantiomers, tautomers) thereof.

A derivative as used herein, refers to a chemically related compound obtained by the chemical modification of an agent (i.e., an insecticidal agent or a molluscicidal agent) by such chemical reactions as substitution, addition, and elimination reactions. With respect to these terms, the insecticidal agent is or comprises an agent or compound that is different or separate from that of the molluscicidal agent and vice versa.

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

In particular embodiments, the molluscicidal agent is selected from the group consisting of a cyclic ketone, such as a cyclo-octane or a. substituted cyclo-octane (e.g., metaldehyde), a carbamate (e.g., methiocarb, thiodicarb, tazimcarb, trimethacarb), a strobilurin (e.g., azoxystrobin, picoxystrobin, trifloxystrobin, kresoxim methyl, enestrobin, orysastrobin, dimoxystrobin, metominostrobin, pyraclostrobin, fluoxastrobin, famoxadone, fenamidone), a metal salt, such as an iron salt (e.g., iron phosphate), a copper salt (e.g., copper sulphate) or an aluminium salt (e.g., aluminium sulphate), a metal chelate, such as an iron chelate (e.g., iron EDTA) a spinosyn mixture (e.g., spinosad, spinetoram), a chloronitrophenol (e.g., niclosamide), an organometal (e.g., fentin hydroxide, fentin acetate) a morpholine (e.g., trifenmorph), a nereistoxin analogue (e.g., bensultap), a pyridine (e.g., pymetrozin), a plant-based molluscicide (e.g., a saponin, a tannin, an alkaloid, an alkyl phenol, a glycoalkaloid, a flavanoid, a sesquiterpene lacton and a terpenoid) and any combination thereof. More preferably, the molluscicidal agent is selected from the group consisting of a cyclic ketone, a carbamate, a metal salt, a metal chelate and any combination thereof. Even more preferably, the molluscicidal agent is selected from the group consisting of metaldehyde, methiocarb, an iron salt, an iron chelate and any combination thereof.

For the present invention, the molluscicidal agent is suitably present in a high enough concentration that provides a granular composition suitable for use in the effective control, prevention and/or eradication of a mollusc infestation. To this end, the molluscicidal agent, may be present in an amount

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 from about 0.5 g/kg to about 500 g/kg or any range therein such as, but not limited to, about 1 g/kg to about 200 g/kg, or about 5 g/kg to about 100 g/kg by weight of the granular composition. In particular embodiments of the present invention, the molluscicidal agent is present in an amount of about 0.5, 1.0,

1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, 9.0, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50,

55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, 90, 95, 100, 110, 120, 130, 140, 150, 160,170,

180, 190, 200, 210, 220, 230, 240, 250, 260, 270, 280, 290, 300, 310,320,

330, 340, 350, 360, 370, 380, 390, 400, 410, 420, 430, 440, 450, 460,470,

480, 490, 500 g/kg, or any range therein, by weight of the granular composition. In certain embodiments of the present invention, the molluscicidal agent is present in an amount of about 5 g/kg to about 50 g/kg by weight of the granular composition.

A suitable insecticidal agent for inclusion in the granular composition of the invention may be one or more insecticidal agents as are known in the art. By way of example, the insecticidal agent is or comprises an agent from the class of a botanical (e.g., allicin, anabasine, azadirachtin, carvacrol, dlimonene, matrine, nicotine, nornicotine, oxymatrine, pyrethrins, cinerins, cinerin I, cinerin II, jasmolin I, jasmolin II, pyrethrin I, pyrethrin II, quassia, rhodojaponin-l 11, rotenone, ryania, sabadilla, sanguinarine, triptolide), a carbamate, a diamide (e.g., broflanilide, chlorantraniliprole, cyantraniliprole, cyclaniliprole, cyhalodiamide, flubendiamide, tetraniliprole), a dinitrophenol (e.g., dinex, dinoprop, dinosam, DNOC), a fluorine insecticide (e.g., barium, hexafluorosilicate, cryolite, flursulamid, sodium fluoride, sodium silicofluoride, sulfluramid), a formamidine (e.g., amitraz, chlordimeform, formetanate,

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 formparanate, medimeform, semiamitraz), a fumigant (e.g., acrylonitrile, carbon disulfide, carbon tetrachloride, carbonyl sulfide, chloroform, chloropicrin, cyanogen, p-dichlorobenzene, 1,2-dichloropropane, dimethyl disulfide, ethyl formate, ethylene dibromide, ethylene dichloride, ethylene oxide, hydrogen cyanide, methyl bromide, methyl iodide, methylchloroform, methylene chloride, naphthalene, phosphine, sodium tetrathiocarbonate, sulfuryl fluoride, tetrachloroethane), an inorganic insecticide (e.g., borax, boric acid, calcium polysulfide, copper oleate, diatomaceous earth, mercurous chloride, potassium thiocyanate, silica gel, sodium thiocyanate), an insect growth regulator (e.g., chitin synthesis inhibitors, juvenile hormone mimics, juvenile hormones, moulting hormone agonists, moulting hormones, moulting inhibitors, precocenes), an isoxazoline ( e.g., afoxolaner, fluralaner, fluxametamide, sarolaner) a macrocyclic lactone (e.g., avermectin insecticides, milbemycin insecticides, spinosyn insecticides) a neonicotinoid, a nereistoxin analogue (e.g., bensultap, cartap, polythialan, thiocyclam, thiosultap), an organophosphorus insecticide (e.g., organophosphate insecticides, organothiophosphate insecticides, phosphonate insecticides, phosphonothioate insecticides, phosphoramidate insecticides, phosphoramidothioate insecticides, phosphorodiamide insecticides), an oxadiazine (e.g., indoxacarb), an oxadiazoIone (e.g., metoxadiazone), a phthalimide (e.g., dialifos, phosmet, tetramethrin) a physical insecticide (e.g., desiccant insecticides), a pyrazole (e.g., phenylpyrazole insecticides, pyrazolecarboxamide insecticides, pyridylpyrazole insecticides), a pyrethroid, a pyrimidinamine (e.g., flufenerim, pyrimidifen), a pyrrole (e.g., chlorfenapyr), a

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 quaternary ammonium insecticide (e.g., sanguinarine), a sulfoximine (e.g., sulfoxaflor), a tetramic acid (e.g., spiropidion, spirotetramat), a tetronic acid (e.g., spiromesifen), a thiazole (e.g., clothianidin, imidaclothiz, thiamethoxam, thiapronil), a thiazolidine (e.g., tazimcarb, thiacloprid), a thiourea (e.g., diafenthiuron), an urea insecticide (e.g., flucofuron, sulcofuron), a zwitterionic insecticide (e.g., dicloromezotiaz, triflumezopyrim) and/or an unclassified insecticide (e.g., afidopyropen, allosamidin, benzpyrimoxan, closantel, copper, aphthenate, crotamiton, EXD, fenazaflor, fenoxacrim, flometoquin, flonicamid, fluhexafon, flupyradifurone, flupyrimin, hydramethylnon, isoprothiolane, jiahuangchongzong, malonoben, metaflumizone, nifluridide, plifenate, pyridaben, pyridalyl, pyrifluquinazon, rafoxanide, thuringiensin, triarathene, triazamate), including derivatives and isomers (e.g., enantiomers, tautomers) thereof..

A useful resource with respect to the various classications of insecticidal agents and examples thereof is available at <http://www.alanwood.net/pesticides/class_insecticides.html>, which is included by reference herein.

In particular embodiments, the insecticidal agent is selected from the group consisting of a carbamate, a neonicotinoid, a phenylpyrazole (e.g., fipronil), a pyrethrin, a pyrethroid, a macrocyclic lactone, an organophosphate, a pyrimidinamine insecticide (e.g., flufenerim, pyrimidifen), a pyrrole insecticide (e.g., chlorfenapyr), a quaternary ammonium insecticide (e.g., sanguinarine), a sulfoximine insecticide (e.g., sulfoxaflor), a tetramic acid insecticide (e.g., spirotetramat), a tetronic acid insecticide (e.g., spiromesifen),

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 an urea insecticide (e.g., flucofuron, sulcofuron, diafenthiuron) a zwitterionic insecticide (e.g., dicloromezotiaz, triflumezopyrim) and any combination thereof. Preferably, the insecticidal agent is selected from the group consisting of a neonicotinoid, a phenylpyrazole and any combination thereof. More preferably, the insecticidal agent is selected from the group consisting of fipronil, thiamethoxam, imidacloprid and any combination thereof.

The carbamate may be that as hereinbefore described for the molluscicidal agent. In particular embodiments, the granular composition includes two or more carbamates. To this end, a first carbamate may be included for preventing and/or controlling a mollusc infestation (i.e., included as a molluscicidal agent) and a second carbamate may be included for preventing and/or controlling an insect infestation (i.e., included as an insecticidal agent). In this regard, it will be understood that particular carbamates may more specifically target or be toxic to molluscs, whilst other carbamates may more specifically target or be toxic to insects.

Neonicotinoids are insecticidal agents that typically act by antagonistically binding to postsynaptic nictotinic receptors in the central nervous system of insects. Exemplary neonicotinoids include, but are not limited to, acetamiprid, clothianidin, dinotefuran, imidacloprid, nitenpyram, thiacloprid, and thiamethoxam.

Phenylpyrazole insecticides are broad-spectrum insecticides that generally target the central nervous system of insects so as to block GABAgated and glutamate-gated chloride channels. This mechanism of action results in central nervous system toxicity of the target insect. By way of

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 example, phenylpyrazole insecticides include, but are not limited to, acetoprole, ethiprole, fipronil, flufiprole, pyraclofos, pyrafluprole, pyriprole, pyrolan, vaniliprole, and any combination thereof.

The term “pyrethrin” refers to naturally occurring compounds generally derived from chrysanthemum flowers. Such compounds normally exert their insecticidal action by altering nerve function, which causes paralysis in target insect pests, eventually resulting in death. Exemplary pyrethrins include, but are not limited to, pyrethrins I, jasmolin I, cinerin I, pyrethrin I, pyrethrins II, jasmolin II, cinerin II, and pyrethrin II.

The term “pyrethroid” is understood in the art to mean a synthetic compound that acts as an insecticide and whose chemical structures are adapted from those of a pyrethrin. As such, pyrethroids act in a similar manner to pyrethrins. Pyrethroids are typically modified to increase their stability in sunlight. Non-limiting examples of pyrethroids include acrinathrin, allethrin, benfluthrin, benzylnorthrin, bioallethrin, bioethanomethrin, bioresmethrin, bifenthrin, cyclethin, cycloprothrin, cyfluthrin, beta-cyfluthrin, gammacyhalothrin, lamdba-cyhalothrin, cypermethrin, alpha-cypermethrin, betacypermethrin, zeta-cypermethrin, cyphenothrin, deltamethrin, empenthrin, esbiothrin, esfenvalerate, etofenprox, fenfluthrin, fenpropathrin, fenvalerate, flucythrinate, flumethrin, imiprothin, isopyrethrin I, kadethrin, metofluthrin, permethrin, 1RS cis-permethrin, phenothrin, prallethrin, resmethrin, silafluofen, sumithrin (d-phenothrin), tau-fluvalinate, tefluthrin, tetramethrin, tralomethrin and transfluthrin.

It will be understood that the term “organophosphate” broadly refers to

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 esters of phosphoric acid which act on the enzyme acetylcholinesterase. Exemplary organophosphates include, but are not limited to, acephate, azamethiphos, azinphos-ethyl, azinphos-methyl, chlorethoxyfos, chlorfenvinphos, chlormephos, chlorpyrifos, methyl chlorpyrifos, coumaphos, cyanophos, demeton-S-methyl, diazinon, dichlorvos/DDVP, dicrotophos, dimethoate, dimethylvinphos, disulfoton, EPN, ethion, ethoprophos, famphur, fenamiphos, fenitrothion, fenthion, flupyrazophos, fosthiazate, heptenophos, isoxathion, malathion, mecarbam, methamidophos, methidathion, mevinphos, monocrotophos, omethoate, oxydemeton-methyl, parathion, methyl parathion, phenthoate, phorate, phosalone, phosmet, phosphamidon, phoxim, pirimiphos-methyl, profenofos, propetamphos, prothiofos, pyraclofos, pyridaphenthion, quinalphos, sulfotep, tebupirimfos, temephos, terbufos, tetrachlorvinphos, thiometon, triazophos, trichlorfon and vamidothion.

Similar to that for the molluscicidal agent, the insecticidal agent is suitably present in a high enough concentration that provides a granular composition suitable for use in the effective control, prevention and/or eradication of an insect infestation. To this end, the insecticidal agent, may be present in an amount from about 0.5 g/kg to about 500 g/kg or any range therein such as, but not limited to, about 1 g/kg to about 200 g/kg, or about 5 g/kg to about 100 g/kg by weight of the granular composition. In particular embodiments of the present invention, the insecticidal agent is present in an amount of about 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, 9.0, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, 90, 95, 100, 110, 120, 130, 140, 150, 160, 170, 180, 190, 200, 210, 220, 230, 240, 250, 260, 270,

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

280, 290, 300, 310, 320, 330, 340, 350, 360, 370, 380, 390, 400, 410, 420,

430, 440, 450, 460, 470, 480, 490, 500 g/kg, or any range therein, by weight of the granular composition. In certain embodiments of the present invention, the insecticidal agent is present in an amount of about 5 g/kg to about 50 g/kg by weight of the granular composition.

As noted above, the granular composition of the invention includes a binder. It will be understood that the binder functions to bind the ingredients or components of the granular composition into a granular or pelleted structure or substrate strate, which preferably resists attrition and will not rapidly degrade, and therefore substantially maintains particle size during handling. To this end, the binder facilitates the formulation of a granular or pelleted composition that typically requires no further preparation, processing, dilution, combination etc before application thereof to an appropriate locus or target area.

Non-limiting examples of binders include calcium stearate, polyhydroxymethyl urea, methyl cellosolve (2-methoxyethanol), polyvinylpyrrolidone, polyvinyl alcohol, polyacrylates, polymethacrylates, natural waxes, chemically modified waxes and synthetic waxes, sugars, starch, alginates, agar, lignosulphonates and gum arabic.

In one particularly preferred embodiment, the binder is or comprises calcium stearate and/or polyhydroxymethyl urea.

In particular embodiments, one or a plurality of binders are present in the granular composition at a concentration of between about 1 g/kg and about 100 g/kg (e.g., about 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12.5, 15, 17.5, 20, 22.5, 25, 27.5, 30, 32.5, 35, 37.5, 40, 42.5, 45, 47.5, 50, 52.5, 55, 57.5, 60, 62.5,

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

65, 67.5, 70, 72.5, 75, 77.5, 80, 82.5, 85, 87.5, 90, 92.5, 95, 97.5, 100 g/kg and any range therein) by weight of the granular composition. The skilled person will appreciate that suitable amounts of the binder can be chosen to suit the particular application in which the granular composition of the 5 invention is to be used.

With respect to the above, the binder is preferably included in an amount so as to confer a suitable level of water resistance to the granular composition of the invention. As used herein, the term “water-resistant” or “water-resistance” means that the granular composition substantially 10 maintains its integrity after contact with liquid water, such as from rainfall, dew and atmospheric humidity, for an extended period of time (e.g., 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 weeks and any range therein), such that after drying the granular composition demonstrates a significantly reduced propensity for collapse and/or degradation so as to maintain its granular or pelleted 15 structure.

In particular embodiments, the granular composition further includes an attractant. The attractant may be any as are commonly known in the art of pelleted or granular compositions for the control of various pests, including molluscs and insects. Furthermore, the attractant may be a phagostimulant.

Phagostimulants are conventionally used in slug and snail bait formulations to attract gastropods to ingest the molluscicide, and are typically attractants and/or food. Mixtures of phagostimulants with other suitable organic and/or inorganic materials may also be used. Additionally, the attractant may function as a carrier and an attractant in the granular composition.

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

The attractant preferably includes one or more of vegetable matter, and in particular ground cereals (e.g., wheat flour, wheat bran, barley flour, rye flour, rice starch), seeds (e.g., crushed rapeseed) and legumes (e.g., crushed soya beans), animal matter (e.g., fish meal, extract of dead slugs), yeast, an oil (e.g., canola oil) and a sugar (e.g., molasses).

The attractant may be present in an amount from about 0.5 g/kg to about 900 g/kg or any range therein such as, but not limited to, about 1 g/kg to about 850 g/kg, or about 10 g/kg to about 800 g/kg by weight of the granular composition. In particular embodiments of the present invention, the attractant is present in an amount of about 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, 9.0, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, 90, 95, 100, 110, 120, 130, 140, 150, 160, 170, 180, 190, 200, 210, 220, 230, 240,

250, 260, 270, 280, 290, 300, 310, 320, 330, 340, 350, 360, 370, 380,390,

400, 410, 420, 430, 440, 450, 460, 470, 480, 490, 500, 510, 520, 530,540,

550, 560, 570, 580, 590, 600, 610, 620, 630, 640, 650, 660, 670, 680,690,

700, 710, 720, 730, 740, 750, 760, 770, 780, 790, 800, 810, 820, 830,840,

850, 860, 870, 880, 890, 900 g/kg, or any range therein, by weight of the granular composition. In certain embodiments of the present invention, the attractant is present in an amount of about 700 g/kg to about 850 g/kg by weight of the granular composition.

In particular embodiments, the granular composition of the present aspect further includes a carrier, and preferably a solid carrier. Non-limiting examples of carriers include: (i) pulverized natural minerals, such as kaolin clay, talc, chalk, quartz, and diatom earth; (ii) pulverized synthetic minerals,

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 such as dispersed silica, aluminium oxide, and silicate; (iii) size reduced and fractionated natural stone materials such as calcite, marble, sepiolith and dolomite; (iv) synthetic granulates from inorganic and organic powders such as from polymers; and (v) granulates from organic materials, such as coconut shells, com cobs and tobacco stems. In particular embodiments, one or a plurality of carriers are present in the granular composition at a concentration of between about 10 g/kg and about 990 g/kg (e.g., about 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, 90, 95, 100, 110, 120, 130, 140, 150, 160, 170, 180, 190, 200, 210, 220, 230, 240, 250, 260, 270, 280, 290,

300, 310, 320, 330, 340, 350, 360, 370, 380, 390, 400, 410, 420, 430,440,

450, 460, 470, 480, 490, 500, 510, 520, 530, 540, 550, 560, 570, 580,590,

600, 610, 620, 630, 640, 650, 660, 670, 680, 690, 700, 710, 720, 730,740,

750, 760, 770, 780, 790, 800, 810, 820, 830, 840, 850, 860, 870, 880,890,

900, 910, 920, 930, 940, 950, 960, 970, 980, 990 g/kg, and any range therein) by weight of the granular composition. The skilled person will appreciate that suitable amounts of the carrier can be chosen to suit the particular application in which the granular composition of the invention is to be used.

One or more additional auxiliary agents, such as surfactants, adjuvants, dispersants, disintegrating agents, lubricants, wetting agents, preservatives, parting agents, colouring agents (e.g., dyes) and the like, can also be added where desired to modify the properties of the granular composition as required. Additionally, it will be appreciated that the granular composition may further include suitable concentrations of a repellent agent for non-target organisms (i.e. organisms other than insects and molluscs), including, for

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 example, an emetic agent and/or an embittering agent, such as Bitrex, to thereby prevent or inhibit other animals, such as humans, domestics pets, birds and the like from ingesting the granular composition of the invention.

In particular embodiments, the granular composition of the present invention further includes a bird repellent agent. The bird repellent agent can be any known in the art, including, for example, aluminium ammonium sulphate, an anthranilate (and related compounds e.g., methyl anthranilate, isobutyl anthranilate, ethyl anthranilate, isobutyl N-methyl anthranilate and methyl N-methyl anthranilate) and a fatty acid (and related compounds).

Suitable preservatives may include, for example, 1,2- benzisothiazolin3-one and/or 2-Methyl-2H-isothiazol-3-one or sodium benzoate or benzoic acid, epoxidized soybean oil, epoxidized linseed oil, ethylene glycol and any combination thereof.

Suitable lubricants may include, for example, artificial and natural fats 15 and oils, such as calcium stearate, liquid paraffin, polyethylene glycol as well as inorganic lubricants such as talc.

Notwithstanding the above, it will be appreciated that an amount of the aforementioned components of the granular composition can vary depending on the intended use thereof, the particular molluscicidal agent and the 20 particular insecticidal agent to be included in the granular composition and the particular pests (i.e., molluscs and/or insects) to be targeted thereby. Additionally, it will be apparent that the aforementioned components, and in particular the insecticidal agent and/or the molluscicidal agent, are preferably

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 included in concentrations that do not adversely affect, for example, the palatability, stability and/or water resistance of the granular composition.

In another aspect, the invention provides a method for preventing and/or controlling a mollusc and/or insect infestation which includes the step of administering an effective amount, such as a molluscicidal- and/or insecticidaleffective amount, of the granular composition of the above aspect to a target area to thereby prevent and/or control the mollusc and/or insect infestation.

As used herein, “preventing” (or “prevent” or “prevention”) refers to a course of action (such as administering an effective amount of the granular composition described herein) initiated prior to the onset of a symptom, aspect, or characteristic of the mollusc and/or insect infestation (e.g., plant or crop damage) so as to prevent, reduce or delay the symptom, aspect, or characteristic thereof. It is to be understood that such preventing need not be absolute to be beneficial to a plant, crop or the like.

As generally used herein, “control” (or “controlled” or “controlling”) refers to an intervention with the granular composition that reduces or ameliorates a symptom, aspect, or characteristic of the mollusc and/or insect infestation after it has begun to develop. The term “ameliorating”, with reference to a mollusc and/or insect infestation, refers to any observable beneficial effect thereto as a result of the administration of the granular composition. The beneficial effect can be determined using any methods or standards known to the ordinarily skilled artisan. Accordingly, these terms are meant to include any lethal (i.e., killing) or inhibitory (i.e., molluscistatic and insectistatic) activities of the granular composition against a given pest,

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 including those hereinafter described.

Herein, the terms “target area”, locus or space refer to any area, location or habitat where the prevention, control and/or eradication of a mollusc and/or insect infestation is needed or expected to be needed.

As used herein, the terms “effective amount”, “molluscicidal-effective amount” and “insecticidal-effective amount” refer to an amount of the granular composition that is effective to cause such prevention, control, and/or eradication of the mollusc and/or insect infestation. By way of example, an effective amount means an amount necessary to produce an observable insecticidal and/or molluscicidal effect on unwanted pests (i.e., insects and molluscs), including the effects of death, growth inhibition, reproduction inhibition, inhibition of proliferation, and removal, destruction, or otherwise diminishing the occurrence and activity of these unwanted pests. An effective amount of the granular composition of the invention may vary according to the prevailing conditions, such as desired molluscicidal and/or insecticidal effect and duration, weather, target species, habitat, mode of application, and the like.

In particular embodiments, an effective amount is the amount of the granular composition of the invention that has an adverse effect (e.g., 20 reproduction inhibition, knockdown and/or death) on at least 25% (e.g., 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60%, 65%, 70%, 75%, 80%, 85%, 90%, 95%, 100% or any range therein) of the pests treated or contacted therewith, more preferably at least 50% of the pests treated or contacted therewith, and

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 even more preferably at least 70% or greater of the pests treated or contacted therewith.

The efficacy of the granular compositions of the present invention may be monitored by determining the mortality of or adverse effect upon treated pests (i.e., molluscs and/or insects). This includes inhibition or modulation of pest growth, inhibition of pest reproduction by slowing or arresting its proliferation, or complete destruction/death of the pest. The actual value of an effective amount for the granular composition is preferably determined by routine screening procedures employed to evaluate insecticidal and/or molluscicidal activity and efficacy, such as those methods well known in the art, including those provided in the Examples.

With respect to the above, an effective amount of the granular composition described herein is preferably administered to the target area or locus of the mollusc and/or insect infestation. By way of example, to prevent or control mollusc- and/or insect-related damage to a plant or crop, an effective amount of a granular composition comprising the molluscicidal agent and the insecticidal agent is administered to an area adjacent and/or including the plant or crop. As such, a mollusc and/or an insect can be readily contacted with an effective amount of the granular composition of the invention.

In a preferred embodiment, the granular composition is applied at a rate of about 0.25 kg to about 10 kg per hectare (e.g., about 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0,

1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 6.5, 7.0, 7.5, 8.0, 8.5, 9.0, 9.5, 10.0 kg per hectare) and more preferably at a rate of about 2 kg to about 4 kg per hectare. Obviously, the amount of the granular composition to be applied

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 per hectare will depend, at least in part, upon the concentration of the molluscicidal agent and the insecticidal agent in the granular composition.

Because the granular composition of the present invention is suitably water resistant, without significant degradation in the performance thereof over 5 time, the granular composition remains pesticidally effective for a commercially reasonable period of time. Accordingly, the formulation can be administered, for example, about every 4 to 12 weeks (e.g., 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11,12 weeks and any range therein) to the target area or locus of the mollusc and/or insect infestation.

In yet a further aspect, the invention provides a method of preparing a granular composition for the control and/or prevention of a mollusc and/or insect infestation, said method including the steps of:

(a) mixing a molluscicidal agent, an insecticidal agent and a binder; and (b) granulating the mixture of step (a);

to thereby prepare the granular composition.

Suitably, the molluscicidal agent, the insecticidal agent and/or the binder are that as hereinbefore described.

In one preferred embodiment, the molluscicidal agent is selected from the group consisting of metaldehyde, methiocarb, an iron salt, an iron chelate 20 and any combination thereof.

In another preferred embodiment, the insecticidal agent is selected from the group consisting of fipronil, thiamethoxam, imidacloprid and any combination thereof.

In yet another preferred embodiment, the binder is or comprises

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 calcium stearate and/or polyhydroxymethyl urea.

Preferably, the granular composition is substantially water resistant, as hereinbefore described.

It will be appreciated that step (b) may be performed by any method known in the art. By way of example, the granulation step (b) may be carried out by conventional processes, such as expanding, extruding, flocculation with or without final structuralization (e.g., granulation or extrusion), which can be performed in any suitable apparatus known to the person skilled in the art. Typically, the required components of the granules are initially mixed together 10 and subsequently subjected to one or more of the above granulation processes. Methods of granulation that may be used for preparation of the granular composition provided herein include, but are not limited to, wet granulation, dry granulation, pan granulation, compaction granulation, centrifugal granulation, fluidized bed granulation, extrusion granulation and 15 any combination thereof.

In one preferred embodiment, the mixture of step (a) is granulated, at least in part, by extrusion granulation.

In another aspect, the invention provides a granular composition prepared by the method of the aforementioned aspect.

Throughout the specification the aim has been to describe the preferred embodiments of the invention without limiting the invention to any one embodiment or specific collection of features. It will therefore be appreciated by those of skill in the art that, in light of the instant disclosure, various

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 modifications and changes can be made in the particular embodiments exemplified without departing from the scope of the present invention.

All computer programs, algorithms, patent and scientific literature referred to herein is incorporated herein by reference.

Any reference to publications cited in this specification is not an admission that the disclosures constitute common general knowledge in Australia.

In order that the invention may be more readily understood and put into practice, one or more preferred embodiments thereof will now be described, 10 by way of example only.

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Example 1: An Embodiment of a Granular Composition

The present example provides an embodiment of a granular composition of the invention including the molluscicide metaldehyde and the 5 insecticide fipronil. The embodiment may be referred to herein by its commercial name of “IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY”.

In the embodiments provided, care has been taken in the selection of active ingredients so as to not only produce a product consistently toxic to both insects and molluscs, but also minimise potential environmental side 10 effects, such as minimal or no toxicity to beneficial insects (e.g., bees) and mammals as well as limiting soil and water contamination thereby.

Table 1 - Metaldehyde 50 + Fipronil 1.5 GB Molluscicide/lnsecticide Raw

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Material Identities

Component	Purchased from (incl. trade name) - Function	Parts by weight (g/kg)
Metaldehyde 98% technical	Metaldehyde (CAS# 108-62-3) - active ingredient (molluscicide) Manufactured by Xu Zhou Nuo Te Chemical Co Ltd, Baiji Qingshangquan Town, Jiawant District, Jiang Su 22100, China Purchased from Xu Zhou Nuo Te Chemical Co Ltd, Baiji Qingshangquan Town, Jiawant District, Jiang Su 22100, China	51.0
Fipronil 98% technical	Fipronil (CAS# 120068-37-3) - active ingredient (insecticide) Manufactured by Zhejiang Hisun Chemical Co Ltd, 97 Washa Road, Jiaojiang District, Taizhou Zhejiang 318000, China Purchased from Xu Zhou Nuo Te Chemical Co Ltd, Baiji Qingshangquan Town, Jiawant District, Jiang Su 22100, China	1.53
Yeast	Yeast (CAS# 68876-77-7) - mollusc/insect attractant Manufactured by Unknown Purchased from Unknown	10.0
Canola oil	Wheat flour (CAS# 120962-03-0) - mollusc/insect attractant Manufactured by Unknown Purchased from Unknown	10.0
Wheat Flour	Wheat flour (CAS# 130498-22-5) - mollusc/insect food source Manufactured by Unknown Purchased from Unknown	708.8
Wheat Bran	Wheat bran (CAS# N/a) - mollusc/insect food source Manufactured by Unknown Purchased from Unknown	100.0
Talc	Talc (CAS# 14807-96-6) - product filler Manufactured by Unknown Purchased from Unknown	53.7
Polyhydroxymethyl urea	Polyhydroxymethyl urea (CAS# 1000-82-4) - product binder Manufactured by Unknown Purchased from Unknown	57.0
Calcium stearate	Calcium stearate (CAS# 1592-23-0) - product binder Manufactured by Unknown Purchased from Unknown	3.0
Brilliant Green Dye	Brilliant Green Dye (CAS# 633-03-4) - product pigment Manufactured by Unknown Purchased from Unknown	5.0

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Table 2 - Product testing results

Test Parameter	Test Method	Required	Observed (Advised preferred formulation)
Appearance	Visual	Green granule	Green granule
Assay	Validated chromatographic method (Accuracy: 98-102%) (Linearity: R > 0.99) (Precision: s/average < 2%)	45.0 to 55.0g/kg metaldehyde 1.125 to 1.875g/kg fipronil	51.9g/kg 1 -59g/kg
Water resistance	Visual	Green granule, free from degradation or phase separation in any format when immersed in water for 24 hours	Complies

Cold temperature stability	Visual	Green granule, free from degradation or phase separation in any format	Complies

Long Term Performance	Various as per above	Test parameter maintained within required range after accelerated aging to approximate 2 years.	Complies

Results

Appearance - The colour of the product is imparted by the use of dyestuffs

Assay - Observed value is not precisely 50g/kg and 1.5g/kg respectively of metaldehyde and fipronil. Variation may be explained as a combination of tech purity exceeding minimum standards of 98% upon which recipe is based, and errors of analysis (chromatography) that may be as large as 1%, but typically 10 less than 0.5%

Water Resistance - Assessment of water resistance of granules acts as a measure of resilience after application; This indicates the granule’s resistance to weathering, particularly following exposure to rainfall, and thereby gauges durability of the formulation and length of availability to target organisms

Cold Temperature Stability - soluble granule does not change in integrity

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 with cold temperature exposure

Long Term Performance - Performance and hence test parameters should be preserved over a time period of two years as a minimum to display adequate resilience of the formulation to aging. This is an APVMA requirement 5 which if not met necessitates the inclusion of a use-by date on the product packaging). Two years of aging is approximated by the storage of product in its usual packaging at 54°C for 2 weeks to approximate with the applicable method being CIPAC MT 46.1

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Example 2 - Method of Manufacturing a Granular Composition

A method for preparing a nominally 1000kg batch of the embodiment of the granular composition from Example 1, inclusive of quality control measures, is 5 as follows:

1.1. Ensure the process blender is empty and clean

1.2. Charge the inputs as follows to the process blender via the hopper:

1. Metaldehyde 98%	51kg
2. Fipronil 98%	1.5kg
3. Yeast	10kg
4. Canola oil	10kg
5. Wheat flour	708.8kg
6. Wheat bran	100kg
7. Talc	53.7kg
8. Polyhydroxymethyl urea	57kg
9. Calcium stearate	3kg
10. Brilliant green dye	5kg

1.3. Seal blender and switch on.

1.4. Blend for a period sufficient to obtain a homogeneous mixture of the dry ingredients (typically 10 minutes).

1.5. Switch off the blender and allow adequate time for any airborne particles within the blending vessel to settle.

1.6. Transfer all material to the secondary vessel to generate an extrudable

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 paste

1.7. Concurrently heat and moisten the dry material blend with the metred addition of steam to the agitating blend to achieve a temperature of the mixture of 70-80°C and a moisture content of approximately 16% by weight.

1.8. Transfer the mix to the extruder and switch the drying receiver on.

Extrude the mixture into the receiver and air dry at no greater than 80°C (N.B. metaldehyde de-polymerizes and sublimes at 112°C) to a moisture content of approximately 1% weight to weight of the formulation. Where the moisture content significantly exceeds 1% weight to weight of the formulation, recycle granules through the dryer (at the end of the run) until the moisture content target is achieved.

1.9. Sample approximately 1kg of product, ensuring it is representative.

1.10. Sub-sample approximately 200g and subject it to the following testing regime.

1.10.1. Active constituent (metaldehyde) content (validated method)

1.10.2. Active constituent (fipronil) content (validated method)

1.10.3. pH of a 1% aqueous solution (CIPAC MT 75.3)

1.10.4. Dust content (CIPAC MT 171)

1.10.5. Bulk density (CIPAC MT 186)

1.11. If active constituent level is satisfactory, record results and proceed to step 1.15.

1.12. If active constituent level is outside the bounds of the acceptable

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 range listed in the specification, adjust the level accordingly by recycling granules through the blending process (Returning to step 1.4) along with additional filler, being talc (for a high active content) or 5 along with additional metaldehyde 98% tech (for a low active content) and/or with additional fipronil 98% tech (for a low active content)..

1.13. If pH of a 1% aqueous solution is satisfactory, record results and proceed to step 1.16. If pH of a 1% aqueous solution is outside the bounds of the acceptable range listed in the specification, quarantine 10 the batch for further investigation and possible rework..

1.14. If dust content is satisfactory, record results and proceed to step

1.17. If dust content is outside the bounds of the acceptable range listed in the specification, return the batch in its entirety to the primary blender, seal, switch on and reprocess from step 1.9 onwards

1.15. If bulk density is satisfactory, record results and proceed to step

1.18.If the bulk density specification is not met, quarantine the batch for further investigation and possible rework.

1.16. Catalogue and store a retention sample of approximately 200g

1.17. Generate a certificate of analysis noting results of testing

1.18. Issue quality clearance giving authority to package goods

1.19. Package the finished goods ensuring both the batch number and manufacturing date is noted on the label.

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Example 3 - Efficacy Trials of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY

IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY was tested in the laboratory and in the field in 3 locations across Australia from May to August, 2016 against two 5 benchmarks of commercial molluscicide bait products utilising 20 g/kg methiocarb marketed as BAYER MESUROL® SNAIL AND SLUG BAIT (APVMA No. 33274/1209) and 50 g/kg metaldehyde marketed as IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT (APVMA No. 64990/58229).

Table 3 - Summary of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY trials

Trial No.	Location	Hypothesis Tested	Results
16IM83a	Mount Barker, WA	Investigation into the efficacy of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY on Portuguese millipedes in a commercials canola crop.	IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically significant control of Portuguese Millipedes compared to the untreated control and IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT with a rate response evident in some analysis.
16IM83b	Mount Barker, WA	Investigation into the efficacy of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY on European Earwigs in a commercial canola crop.	IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated equivalent control at 2 kg/ha and statistically significant control at 4 and 8 kg/ha of European Earwigs compared to IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT. When assessed via corrected mortality, control was statistically significant at all rates.

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

16IM95a	Minlaton, SA	Investigation into the efficacy of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY on Slaters in a commercial lentil crop.	IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically significant control of Slaters compared to the untreated control and IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT with a rate response evident in some analysis. IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically equivalent to statistically significant control to industry standard MESUROL.
16IM95b	South Australian Research and Development facilities (Waite campus), Urrbrae, SA	Investigation into the bio- equivalency of INTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY to that of IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT on Common White Snails.	IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically equivalent to statistically significant control of Common White Snails compared to IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT. IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY and IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT were consumed in statistically equivalent amounts.
16IM95C	South Australian Research and Development facilities (Waite campus), Urrbrae, SA	Investigation into the efficacy of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY on Slaters in a laboratory assay.	IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically significant control of Slaters at all rates compared to IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT and the PLACEBO. IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically equivalent control compared to MESUROL, and lower rates were needed to control Slaters compared to MESUROL.

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

16IM95d	South Australian Research and Development facilities (Waite campus), Urrbrae, SA	Investigation into the efficacy of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY on European Earwigs in a laboratory assay.	IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY provided complete control of European Earwigs. IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically significant control compared to IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT and statistically equivalent to statistically significant control compared to MESUROL. Lower rates of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY were needed compared to MESUROL.
16IM95e	South Australian Research and Development facilities (Waite campus), Urrbrae, SA	Investigation into the efficacy of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY on Portuguese Millipedes in a laboratory assay.	IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY provided complete control of Portuguese Millipedes. IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically significant control compared to MESUROL and IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT. Lower rates of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY were needed compared to MESUROL.

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Conclusions:

Overall, IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY was shown to:

1. Control a number of insect pests from various taxonomic phylum including Common White Snails, Portuguese Millipedes, European

Earwigs and Slaters in both laboratory and field scenarios.

2. Consistently provide statistically significant control of all pests compared to IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT, PLACEBO and control treatments at all rates.

3. Provide either statistically equivalent or statistically significant control of all pests compared to BAYER MESUROL® SNAIL AND SLUG BAIT at all rates.

4. Provide statistically equivalent control of Slaters, European Earwigs and Portuguese Millipedes at lower rates compared to BAYER MESUROL® SNAIL AND SLUG BAIT.

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Trial 16IM83a- Investigation into the efficacy of IMTRADE METAKILL

SYNERGY on Portuguese millipedes in a commercials canola crop.

One small plot replicated field trial was conducted between May and June 2016 in Mount Barker WA to investigate the efficacy on IMTRADE 5 METAKILL SYNGERY on Portuguese millipedes when applied as a broadcast bait treatment in a commercial canola crop.

IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically significant control over Portuguese millipedes compared to the untreated control and IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT when assessed by dead 10 individuals recovered, live individuals recovered and corrected mortality. A rate response of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY was demonstrated in the live millipede and corrected mortality assessments. IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY did not influence the amount of invertebrate damage to germinated canola seedlings.

Table 1: Comparison of treatment means. Mean damage to canola seedlings (0-lGscale)

No.	Treatment	Application rate (kg'ha)	0 DAT 17/05/2016	3 DAT 20/05/2016	7 DAT 24/05/2016	14 DAT 31/05/2016
1	Untreated	0	0.5	1.2	1.0	1.0
2	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	2	0.0	0.6	0.9	0.6
3	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	4	0.1	0.3	0.7	0.2
4	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	8	0.2	0.6	0.9	0.5
5	Imtrade Metalall Snail & Slug Bait	4	0.0	0.8	0.8	0.2
P value	0.223	0.142	0.613	0.122
LSD	ns	ns	ns	ns

ns _ no statistical significance alp --0.05

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Table 2: Comparison of treatment means. Mean number of canola seedlings

No.	Treatment	Application rate (kg/ha)	0 DAT 17/05/2016	3 DAT 20/05/2016	7 DAT 24/05/2016	14 DAT 31/05/2016
1	Untreated	0	7.0	7.2	7.4	6.6
2	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	2	6.6	6.4	6.2	5.6
3	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	4	6.8	6.4	6.8	6.2
4	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	8	7.0	8.0	7.6	7.2
5	Imtrade Metakill Snail & Slug Bait	4	6.4	6.2	6.0	6.0
P value	0.991	0.673	0.692	0.702
LSD	ns	ns	ns	ns

ns - no statistical significance at p -^:0.05

Table 3: Comparison of Treatment means. Mean number of dead Portuguese millipedes observed

No.	Treatment	Application rate (kg/ha)	3 DAT 20/05/2016	7 DAT 24/05/2016	14 DAT 31/05/2016	15DAT 1/06/2016	Cumulative Total	Total Recovered (Dead + Alive)
	Untreated	0	0.4	0.0	0.4 b	0.0	0.8 b	18.0
2	[mtrade Metakill Synergy	2	0.2	0.0	12.2a	0.0	12.4a	18.8
3	[mtrade Metakill Synergy'	4	0.0	0.0	14.6 a	0.0	14.6a	18.8
4	[mtrade Metakill Synergy	8	0.0	0.0	14.8 a	0.0	14.8a	17.2
5	[mtrade Metakill Snail & Slug Bait	4	0.0	0.0	3.4 b	0.0	3.4 b	18.4
P value		0.565	1	<0.001	1	<0.001	0.58
LSD			ns	ns	3.97	ns	3.89	ns

es - no statistical significance at p <0.05

Means within the cell with a letter in common aie not significantly difieieat (P>0.05)

Table 4: Comparison of treatment means. Mean number of live Portuguese millipedes observed at trial completion

Na.	Treatment	Application rate (kg'ha)	14 DAT 31/05/2016	15 DAT 1/06/2016	Cumulative Total	Total Recovered (Dead + Alive)
	Untreated	0	16.8 c	0.4	17.2 c	18.0
2	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	2	6.0 b	0.4	6.4 b	18.8
3	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	4	4.2 ab	0.0	4.2 ab	18 8
4	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	8	2.4 a	0.0	2.4 a	17.2
5	Imtrade Metakill Snail & Slug Bait	4	15.0 c	0.0	15.0 c	18.4
P value	<0.001	0.130	<0.001	0.58
LSD	2.75	ns	2.87	ns

ns - no statistical significance at p <0.05

Means within the same cell with a letter in common are not significantly different (P>0.05)

Table 5: Comparison of treatment means. Mean mortality of Portuguese millipedes as a percentage of the total recovered (Alive +Dead)

No.	Treatment	Application rate (kg/ha)	Corrected Mortality (%)
1	Untreated	0	4.0 c
2	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	2	65.3 b
3	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	4	76.9 ab
4	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	8	85.4 a
5	Imtrade Metakill Snail & Slug Bait	4	18.8 c
P value	<0.001
LSD	16.93
Means within the same cell with a letter in common are not significantly different (P^:;	0.05)

Collected Mortality ii the mortality of Portuguese millipedes as a percentage of the total number of recovered Portuguese millipedes. CM % ⁼ : (Tih·» + ΤαμηΏ s 100

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

16IM83b - Investigation into the efficacy of IMTRADE METAKILL

SYNERGY on European earwigs in a commercial canola crop.

One small plot replicated field trial was conducted between May and June 2016 in Mount Barker WA to investigate the efficacy on IMTRADE 5 METAKILL SYNGERY on European Earwigs when applied as a broadcast bait treatment in a commercial canola crop.

IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically significant control of European earwigs compared to the untreated control when assessed as total live earwigs at the 4 and 8 kg/ha rates and equivalent 10 control compared to IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT at the 2 kg/ha rate. IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically significant control of European earwigs compared to the untreated control and IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT when assessed via corrected mortality at all application rates.

Table 1: Comparison of treatment means. Mean damage to canola seedlings (0-10 scale)

No.	Treatment	Application rate (kg/ha)	0DAT 17/05/2016	3 DAT 20/05/2016	7 DAT 24/05/2016	14 DAT 31/05/2016
1	Untreated	0	0.3	2.4	1.9	2.0
2	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	2	0.1	1.9	1.8	1.5
3	Initrade Metakdl Synergy	4	0.1	1.6	1.3	1.0
4	Imtrade Metalall Synergy	8	0.7	2.0	1.7	2.2
5	Initrade Metalall Snail & Slug Bait	4	00	1.4	1.4	1.2
P value	0.16	0.712	0.744	0.532
LSD	ns	ns	ns	ns

ns - no statistical significance atp <0.05

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Table 2: Comparison of treatment means. Mean number of canola seedlings

No.	Treatment	Application rate (kg/ha)	0DAT 17/05/2016	3 DAT 20/05/2016	7 DAT 24/05/2016	14 DAT 31/05/2016
1	Untreated	0	6.6	6.2	5.8	5.6
2	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	2	7.4	6.8	6.6	5.2
3	Imtrade Metalall Synergy	4	6.4	6.4	6.2	6.4
4	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	8	7.4	6.2	6.0	5.6
5	Imtrade Metalall Snail & Slug Bait	4	6.6	6.0	5.4	5.0
P value	0.495	0.867	0.682	0.649
LSD	ns	ns	ns	ns

ns - no statistical significance atp <0.05

Table 3: Comparison of treatment means. Mean mimber of dead European earwigs observed

No.	Treatment	Application rate (k\|>/ha)	3 DAT 20/05/2016	7 DAT 24/05/2016	14 DAT 31/05/2016	15 DAT 1/06/2016	Cumulative Total	Total Recovered (Dead + Alive)
	Untreated	0	0.0 b	0.2	0.6	0.0	0.8	6.0
2	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	2	0.0 b	0.0	1.8	0.6	2.4	2.8
3	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	4	0.6 ab	0.0	2.2	0.4	3.2	3.8
4	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	8	1.2 a	0.0	0.6	0.2	2.0	3.6
5	Imtrade Metakill Snail & Slug Bait	4	0.0 b	0.0	0.6	0.4	1.0	3.8
P value	0.039	0.436	0.127	0.645	0.063	0.331
LSD	0.89	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns

n& - no statistical sipnificanr.e at p <0.05

Means within the same cell with a letter in common are not rignifirantly different ¢^=4).05)

Table 4: Comparison of treatment means. Mean number of live European earwigs observed at trial completion

No.	Treatment	Application late (kg/ha)	14 DAT 31/05/2016	15 DAT 1/06/2016	Total Live	Total Recovered (Dead + Alive)
1	Untreated	0	4.4 b	0.8	5.2 b	6.0
2	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	2	0.0 a	0.4	0.4 a	2.8
3	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	4	0.2 a	0.4	0.6 a	3.8
4	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	8	1.6 a	0.0	1.6 a	3.6
5	Imtrade Metakill Snail & Slug Bait	4	1.6 a	1.2	2.8 ab	3.8
P value	0.009	0.170	0.01	0.331
LSD	2.39	ns	2.69	ns

ns - no statistical significance at p <0.05

Means within the same cell with a letter in common are not significantly different (P-0.05)

Table S: Comparison of treatment means. Mean mortality of European earwigs as a percentage of the total recovered (Alive —Dead)

No.	Treatment	Application rate (kg/ha)	Corrected Mortality (%>
1	Untreated	0	13.7 b
2	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	2	833 a
3	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	4	82.7 a
4	Imtrade Metakill Synergy	8	64.0 a
5	Imtrade Metakill Snail & Slug Bait	4	23.7 b
P value	0.002
LSD	38.08

Means within the «me cell with a letter in common are not significantly different (P“«0.05)

Corrected Mortality is the mortality of European earwigs as a percentage of the total number of recovered European earwigs. CM %⁼ {TrkaH (Tlij.1} 4- T.-fa.d)} x 100

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Trial 16IM95a - Investigation into the efficacy of IMTRADE METAKILL

SYNERGY on Slaters in a commercial lentil crop.

One small plot replicated field trial was conducted in July 2016 in Minlaton SA to investigate the efficacy of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY on 5 Slaters when applied as a broadcast bait treatment in a commercial lentil crop.

IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY and demonstrated a statistically significant control of Slaters at all rates compared to the untreated control and IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT when assessed by dead slaters, live slaters and corrected mortality. IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG 10 BAIT demonstrated a statistically significant control of slaters compared to the untreated control however it was significantly less to that provided by IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY. IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY exhibited a rate response when assessed by dead individuals and corrected mortality demonstrated by the lesser response of the 2 kg/ha rate. IMTRADE 15 METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically equivalent control to industry standard MESUROL in all cases except for 4 kg/ha of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY assessed by dead individuals which preformed significantly better.

Table 1: Comparison of treatment means, Mean damage to lentil seedlings (0-10 scale)

No.	Treatment	Application rate (kg/ha)	0 DAT 5/07/2016	8 DAT 13/7/2016
A	lint Metakill Synergy	2	0.0	0.0
B	lint Metakill Synergy	4	0.0	0.0
C	lint Metakill Synergy	8	0.0	0.0
D	Mesurol	2	0.0	0.0
E	Ihit Metakill Snail & Slug Bait	4	0.0	0.0
F	Untreated	-	0.0	0.0
P value	NA	NA
LSD	—	—

NA signifies data was not analysed

Table 2: Comparison of treatment means. Mean (se mean) number of lentil seedlings per plot

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

No.	Treatment	Application rate (kg/ha)	0 DAT 5/07/2016	8 DAT 13/7/2016
A	but Metakill Synergy	2	30.4	3.2	31.2	3.1
B	but Metakill Synergy	4	26.4	2.0	27.4	2.7
C	Init Metakill Synergy	8	30.2	4.4	30.2	4.4
D	Mesurol	2	29.6	1.4	29.6	1.5
E	Imt Metakill Snail & Slug Bait	4	26.6	1.1	26.6	1.1
F	Untreated	-	28.8	1.1	29.4	1.3
P value	0.795	0.822
LSD	OS	ns

ns - no statistical significance at p <0.05

Table 3: Comparison of treatment means. Mean number of dead Slaters observed per plot

No.	Treatment	Application rate (kg/ha)	0DAT 5/07/2016	8 DAT 13/7/2016
A	Imt Metakill Synergy	2	0.0	18.4^b 1.2
B	but Metakill Synergy	4	0.0	24.6^a 1.3
C	blit Metakill Synergy	8	0.0	20.0^ab 0.5
D	Mesurol	2	0.0	18.2^b 1.7
E	but Metakill Snail & Slug Bait	4	0.0	12.6^C 2.6
F	Untreated	-	0.0	6.0=¹ 2.0
P value	NA	PC 0.001
LSD	-	4.96

NA signifies, data was not analysed

Table 4: Comparison of treatment means. Mean number of live Slaters observed per plot.

No.	Treatment	Application rate (kg/ha)	0 DAT 6/07/2016	8 DAT 13/7/2016
A	Imt Metakill Synergy	2	30	0.0	1.6^C 0.5
B	blit Metakill Synergy	4	30	0.0	0.0^C 0.0
C	lint Metakill Synergy	8	30	0.0	0.4^c 0.4
D	Mesurol	2	30	0.0	0.8^c 0.4
E	but Metakill Snail & Slug Bait	4	30	0.0	9.0^b 1.5
F	Untreated	-	30	0.0	14^a 1.8
P value	NA	PC 0.001
LSD	-	2.88

NA signifies data was not analysed

Table 5.- Comparison of treatment means. Mean mortality of Slaters as a percentage of the total recovered (Alive +Dead)

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

No.	Treatment Application rate (kgha)	Collected Mortality	Transformed Mortality data
A lint Metakill Synergy' 2 B Init Metakill Synergy' 4 C lint Metakill Synergy' 8 D Mesurcl 2 E lint Metakill Snail & Slug Bait 4 F Untreated	93% 41% 100% 45% 98% 44% 95% 43% 56% 25% 29% 13%	1.33 b 1.57 a 1.51 ab 1.40 ab 0.86 c 0.56 d
P value	NA	P< 0.001
LSD	—	0.21

NA signifies data wa-s not analysed

C directed Mortality is the mortality of Slaters as a percentage of the total number of recovered Slaters. CM % = ·ΓΤ.^ ·' (Tn™ TauJ} x 100 Transformed mortality data within the same cell with a letter in common are not significantly different {P>0.05}

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Trial 16IM95b - Investigation into the bio-equivalency of IMTRADE

METAKILL SYNERGY to that of IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG

BAIT on Common White Snails.

One replicated laboratory assay was conducted in July 2016 at the

South Australian Research and Development facilities, Urrbrae SA to investigate the bio-equivalency of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY to that of

IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT on Common White Snails.

IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY and IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG

BAIT demonstrated statistically equivalent control of common white snails and 10 statistically significant control compared to the PLACEBO. IMTRADE

METAKILL SYNERGY at a rate of 3 pellets per arena demonstrated statistically significant control over IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT at the same rate, with all other rates of both products demonstrating statistically equivalent control to IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY at 3 pellets 15 per arena. Common White Snails consumed a statistically higher amount of

PLACEBO than either IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY or IMTRADE

METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT, which were consumed in statistically equivalent amounts.

Table L* Weight ofpellets pre and post Common White Snail introduction and the calculated weight of pellets consumed per treatment

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 with mean SE analysis.

TREATMENT ANALYSIS
No.	Treatment	No. Pellets (per arena)	Applied Wt mg	Subset Dw mg	Recovered Dw Wig	Consumption*
	SE
A	IMT METAKILL SYNERGY		20	19	11	8.2¹	3.1
B	IMT METAKILL SYNERGY	3	53	49	41.8	7.5 ^h	0.8
C	IMT METAKILL SYNERGY	6	89	82	75	7.3 ^b	0.6
D	IMT METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BATT		18	16.6	6.6	10.0 ^b	2.4
E	IMT METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BATT	3	42	39	32.2	7.0¹	1.2
F	IMT METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BATT	6	79	74	65.2	8.9 ^b	0.8
G	PLACEBO	6	94	91.2	0	91.2³	0.9
P value	ana	ana	ana	<0.001
LSD				4.77
FACTORIAL ANALYSIS
Formulation
	IMT METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT		46.5 ^b	43.2 ^b	34.7 ^b	8.6
	IMT METAKILL SYNERGY		54.3 ³	50.0 ³	42.6 ³	7.6
P value			<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	0.496
LSD			3.35	3.13	4.25	ns
Application Rate
			19.2 ^c	17.8 ^c	8.8 ^c	9.1
		3	47.6 ^b	44.0 ^b	37.0 ^b	7.2
		6	84.5 ³	78.0 ³	70.1 ^a	8.1
P value			<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	0.575
LSD			4.10	3.83	5.20	ns

Means within the same cell with a letter in eommcm are not significantly different (P-1).05} am - analysis not applicable nt - no statistical significance atp -0.05 * consumption = subset dw - recovered dw as outlined in 3.6.2 'Methodology'

Table 2: Analysis of treatment means with SE; Mean number of dead snails per arena 3 Jr 7 DAT and corrected mortality percentage.

TREATMENT ANALYSIS
No. Treatment	No. Pellets (per arena)	3 DAT 11/7/2016	7 DAT 15/7/16	Corrected Mortality* (%)
A IMT METARULE SYNERGY 1 B IMT METAKILL SYNERGY J C IMT METARULE SYNERGY 6 D IMT METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT 1 E IMT METARULE SNAIL & SLUG BAIT 3 F IMT METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT 6 G PLACEBO 6	7 2 ^abl Q9 7.6 ⁸ 0.5 8.0’ 0.3 6.8^ab 0.6 5.8 ^b 0.7 7.2 ^ab 0.5 0.6 ^c 0.2	7.4^ab 0.9 8.0 ^a 0.3 8.0’ 0.3 6.8^ab 0.6 6.2^b 0.8 7.6^ab 0.5 2.6 ^c 0.6	64.6 12.6 72.8 4.3 72.8 4.3 56.6 7.9 48.6 10.7 67.4 6.8
P value	<0.001	<0.001	0.291
LSD	1.62	1.79	ns
FAC TORIAL ANALYSIS
Formulation
IMT METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT IMT METAKILL SYNERGY	6.6 7.6	6.9 7.8	57.5 70.1
P value LSD	0.0503	0.077	0.079
ns	ns	ns
Application Rate
1 3 6	7,0 6,7 7,6	7.1 7.1 7.8	60.6 60.7 70.1
P value LSD	0.322	0.439	0.439
ns	ns	ns

Means within the same cell with a letter in oom τη on are not significantly different (PirtJ.OS) ns - no statistical significance at p <0..0 5 * corrected mortality'calculated using Abbots formula as outlined in3.7.1 'Assessment Details’

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Trial 16IM95c - Investigation into the efficacy of IMTRADE METAKILL

SYNERGY on Slaters in a laboratory assay.

One replicated laboratory assay was conducted in August 2016 at the South Australian Research and Development facilities, Urrbrae SA to 5 investigate the efficacy of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY on Slaters when used as a bait treatment and quantity the amount consumed to inform field rates.

IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically significant control of slaters at all rates tested when assed by dead individuals, live 10 individuals, corrected mortality and reduction percentage compared to IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT and the PLACEBO. IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically equivalent control of Slaters as industry standard MESUROL. Lower rates of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY are required to control Slaters compared to the industry standard 15 MESUROL as 26 mg/arena (2 pellets) and 47 mg/arena (4 pellets) of

IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically equivalent control of Slaters as 55 mg/arena (2 pellets) of MESUROL.

Table 1: Weight of pellets pre anti post Slater introduction and the calculated weight of pellets consumed per treatment with mean SE analysis.

No.	Treatment	No. Pellets (per arena)	Applied Wt (mg)	Subset Dtv (mg)	Recovered Dw (mg)	Consumption*
'«g	SE
A	METAKILL SYNERGY	2	26	25	23	I.®¹	0.6
B	METAKILL SYNERGY	4	47	45	43		0.3
C	METAKILL SYNERGY	8	91	91	86	0.2'	0.3
D	MESUROL	2	55	53	46	6.5’^b	1.9
E	METAKILL	4	43	41	42	o.o^c	0.3
F	PLACEBO	4	51	57	46	11.2^a	3.7
P value	ana	ana	ana	P <0.001
LSD				5.07

Means within the same cell with a letter in common are not significantly different (PML05) ana - analysis not applicable • consumption = subset dw— recovered dw as outlined in 3.6.2 ‘Methodology⁷

Table 2: Comparison of treatment means. Mean number of dead Slaters observed per arena with mean SE analysis.

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

No.	Treatment	No. Pellets (per arena)	0 DAT 30/07/2016	8 DAT
7/8/2016 \|	SE
A	METAKILL SYNERGY	2	0.0	9.4¹	0.40
B	METAKILL SYNERGY	4	0.0	9.4¹	0.60
C	METAKILL SYNERGY	8	0.0	8.8^ab	0.80
D	MESUROL	2	0.0	8.6^lb	0.51
E	METAKILL	4	0.0	6.8^b	1.07
F	PLACEBO	4	0.0	3.6°	0.81
P value	ana	P< 0.001
LSD	—	2.13

ana - analysis not applicable

Means within the same cell with a letter in common are not significantly different (P*0.05)

Table S: Comparison of treatment means. Mean number of live Slaters observed per arena

No.	Treatment	No. Pellets	0DAT		8 DAT
		(per arena)	30/07/2016 \|	SE	7/8/2016	SE
A	METAKILL SYNERGY	2	10	0.0	0.2^c	0.20
B	METAKILL SYNERGY	4	10	0.0	o.o^c	0.00
C	METAKILL SYNERGY	8	10	0.0	0.0^C	0.00
D	MESUROL	2	10	0.0	0.2^c	0.20
E	METAKILL	4	10	0.0	2.4^b	0.93
F	PLACEBO	4	10	0.0	6.0^a	0.84
P value	ana	P< 0.001
LSD	—	1.53

ana - analysis not applicable

Means within the same cell with a letter in common are not significantly different (PXJ.05)

Table 4: Comparison oftreatment means. Mean mortality of Slaters as a percentage of the total recovered (Alive +Dead) and percentage Reduction from untreated Placebo

No.	Treatment	No. Pellets	Corrected Mortality	Reduction
		(per arena)	%	SE	% SE
A	METAKILL SYNERGY	2	93^a	41	97¹	3
B	METAKILL SYNERGY	4	100^a	45	100³	0
C	METAKILL SYNERGY	8	98^a	44	100³	0
D	MESUROL	2	95³	43	96³	11
E	METAKILL	4	56^l	25	56^b	0
F	PLACEBO	4	29^c	13	ana
P value	P< 0.001	P <0.001
LSD	23.3	19.1

ana - analysis not applicable

Transformed mortality data within the same cell with a letter in common are not significantly different (P>0.Q5)

Corrected Mortality is the mortality of Slaters as a percentage of tha total numfipn- of recovered Slaters. CM% = {T^oi/(Ti^ + T^all- κ 100 Reduction from untreated controls (Reduction %) was calculated using Sun-Shepard's formula as outlined in 3.7.1 Assessment Details’

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Trial 16IM95d - Investigation into the efficacy of IMTRADE METAKILL

SYNERGY on European Earwigs in a laboratory assay.

One replicated laboratory assay was conducted in May 2016 at the

South Australian Research and Development facilities, Urrbrae SA to investigate the efficacy of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY on European Earwigs when used as a bait treatment and quantity the amount consumed to inform field rates.

IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY provided complete control of European Earwigs in this assay. IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically significant control of European Earwigs when assessed via corrected mortality at all rates compared to industry standard MESUROL, IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT and PLACEBO. IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically significant control of European Earwigs at all rates when assessed by dead individuals compared to IMTRADE METAKILL SNAIL & SLUG BAIT and PLACEBO, and statistically equivalent control compared to industry standard MESUROL. Lower rates of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY are required to control European Earwigs compared to the industry standard MESUROL as 26 mg/arena (2 pellets) and 53 mg/arena (4 pellets) of IMTRADE METAKILL

SYNERGY demonstrated statistically significant control of European Earwigs compared to 75 mg/arena (2 pellets) of MESUROL.

Table 1: Weight ofpellets pre and post European Earwig introduction and the calculated weight of pellets consumed per treatment with mean SE analysis.

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

No.	Treatment	No. Pellets (per arena)	Applied Wt (mg)	Subset Dw (mg)	Recovered Dw (mg)	Consumption*
«5 \|	SE
A	METAKILL SYNERGY	2	26	26	21	6<i	0.5
B	METAKILL SYNERGY	4	53	52	46	6*	0.6
C	METAKILL SYNERGY	8	106	105	99	5 ^d	0.4
D	MESUROL	2	75	74	51	23	5.9
E	METAKILL	4	53	53	2	51^b	2.8
F	PLACEBO	4	63	62	0	62 ³	1.1
P value	ana	ana	ana	P< 0.001
LSD				8.02

Means within the same cell with a letter in common are not significantly different (7-4).05) ana - analysis not applicable * consumption = subset dw - recovered dw as outlined in 3.6.2 ‘Methodology’

Table 2: Comparison of treatment means. Mean number ofdead European Earwig s observed per arena with mean SE analysis.

No.	Treatment	No. Pellets	0DAT 30/04/2016	3 DAT	8 DAT
(pe	arena)	3/05/2016	SE	8/05/2016	SE
A	METAKILL SYNERGY		2	0.0	10.0^a	0.0	10.0 ^a	0.0
B	METAKILL SYNERGY		4	0.0	10.0^a	0.0	10.0 ^a	0.0
C	METAKILL SYNERGY		8	0.0	10.0^a	0.0	10.0 ^a	0.0
D	MESUROL		2	0.0	9.2^b	0.4	9.6 ^a	0.2
E	METAKILL		4	0.0	1.2'	0.2	3.0 ^b	0.4
F	PLACEBO		4	0.0	0.4 ^d	0.2	2.8 ^b	0.4
P value	ana	P< 0.001	PC 0.001
LSD	-	0.584	0.754

ana - analysis not applicable

Table 3: Comparison of treatment means. Corrected Mortality of European Earwigs expressed as a percentage reduction from untreated p calculated using Abbotts formulae.

No.	Treatment	No. Pellets (per arena)	Corrected Mortality*
%	8DAT 1	SE
A	METAKILL SYNERGY	2	100^a	0
B	METAKILL SYNERGY	4	100 ’	0
C	METAKILL SYNERGY	8	100 ^a	0
D	MESUROL	2	97 ^b	2
E	METAKILL	4	45 '	3
P value	P < 0.001
LSD	0.102

ana - analysis not applicable

Transformed mortality data within the same cell with a letter in rommon are not significantly different (Βη).Ο5) * corrected mortality' calculated using Abbots formula as outlined in 3.7.1 ‘Assessment Details'

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Trial 16IM95e- Investigation into the efficacy of IMTRADE METAKILL

SYNERGY on Portuguese Millipedes in a laboratory assay.

One replicated laboratory assay was conducted in May 2016 at the

South Australian Research and Development facilities, Urrbrae SA to investigate the efficacy of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY on Portuguese Millipedes when used as a bait treatment and quantity the amount consumed to inform field rates.

IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY provided complete control of Portuguese Millipedes in this assay and demonstrated statistically equivalent 10 control at all rates. IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically significant control of Portuguese Millipedes compared to the PLACEBO, IMTRADE METAKILL and MESUROL when assessed by dead millipedes and corrected mortality. Lower rates of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY are required to control Portuguese Millipedes compared to the industry standard

MESUROL as 28 mg/arena (2 pellets) and 57 mg/arena (4 pellets) of IMTRADE METAKILL SYNERGY demonstrated statistically significant control of Portuguese Millipedes compared to 96 mg/arena (2 pellets) of MESUROL.

Table 1: Weight ofpellets pre and post Portuguese Millipede introduction and the calculated weight of pellets consumed per treatment with mean SE analysis.

No.	Treatment	No. Pellets (per arena)	Applied Wt (mg)	Subset Dw (mg)	Recovered Dw (mg)	Consumption*
	SE
A	METAKILL SYNERGY	2	30	23	IS	10^c	0.3
B	METAKILL SYNERGY	4	60	57	47	10'	0.5
c	METAKILL SYNERGY	3	116	110	98	11'	0.5
D	MESUROL	2	1C1	96	82	15^c	3.0
E	METAKILL	4	52	49	0	49 ¹	2.1
F	PLACEBO	4	77	72	0	72 ’	3.4
P value	ana	ana	ana	P< 0.001
LSD				6.104

Means within the same cell with a letter in common are not significantly diffi>rgnt (PXL05) mi - analysis not applicable * consumption = subset dw - recovered dw as outlined in 3.6.2 'Methodology’

Table 2: Comparison of treatment means. Mean number of dead Portuguese Millipedes observed per arena with mean SE analysis.

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

No.	Treatment	No. Pellets	0 DAT 2/05/2016	Λ DAT	8 DAT
(pe	arena)	5/05/2016	SE	10/05/2016	SE
A	METAKILL SYNERGY		2	0.0	10.0 ‘	0.0	10.0’	0.0
B	METAKILL SYNERGY		4	0.0	10.0’	0.0	10.0’	0.0
C	METAKILL SYNERGY		8	0.0	10.0’	0.0	10.0’	0.0
D	MESUROL		2	0.0	9.2^b	0.4	9.4 ^b	0.2
E	METAKILL		4	0.0	0.0'	0.0	0.2'	0.2
F	PLACEBO		4	0.0	0.0'	0.0	0.0'	0.0
P value	ana	P< 0.001	P< 0.001
LSD	—	0.446	0.377

ana - analysis not applicable

Table 3: Comparison of treatment means. Corrected Mortality (%) ofPortuguese Millipedes expressed as a percentage reduction from i group as calculated using Abbotts formulae.

No.	Treatment	No. Pellets (per arena)	Corrected Mortality” 8DAT % SE
A METAKILL· SYNERGY 2 B METAKILL SYNERGY 4 C METAKILL SYNERGY 8 D MESUROL 2 E METAKILL 4	100^a 0 100’ 0 100’ 0 94 ^b 2 2 ^c 2
P value	P < 0.001
LSD	13

ana - analysis not applicable

Transformed mortality data within the same cell with a letter in common are not significantly different {F-0.05) * corrected mortality calculated, using Abbots formula as outlined in 3.7.1 ‘Assessment Details'

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Example 4 - Alternative Embodiments of a Granular Composition

Variations on the embodiment of the granular composition outlined in Examples, with an alternative insecticide in place of the fipronil component, have also been evaluated for efficacy.

The first embodiment below replaces fipronil with thiamethoxam (CAS#

153719-23-4).

The second embodiment replaces fipronil with imidacloprid (CAS# 138261-41-3).

The third embodiment retains fipronil but varies the active ingredient content from the preferred embodiment of 50g/kg methaldehyde with 1.5g/kg fipronil to 100g/kg metaldehyde and 30g/kg fipronil thereby providing support for variations of the granular composition across varying types of molluscicide and insecticide as well as concentrations thereof.

Table 3 - 50g/kg metaldehyde + 1.5g/kg thiamethoxam granular composition

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Ingredient	Role	Concentration
Metaldehyde (CAS# 108-62-3) technical material, typically 98%	Active molluscicidal ingredient	51.0g/kg (to yield 50g/kg on 100% basis)
Thiamethoxam (CAS# 153719- 23-4) technical material, typically 97%	Active insecticidal ingredient	1.55g/kg (to yield 1.5g/kg on 100% basis)
Yeast (CAS# 68876-77-7)	Bait attractant	10g/kg
Canola oil (CAS# 120962-03-0)	Bait attractant	10g/kg
Wheat flour (CAS# 130498-22-5) and Wheat bran (CAS# N/a) or other cereal content	Bait attractant	~800g/kg
Polyhydroxymethyl urea (CAS# 1000-82-4)	Binder	57g/kg
Calcium stearate (CAS# 1592- 23-0)	Binder/conditioner	3g/kg
Brilliant green dye (CAS# 633- 03-4)	Pigment/dye	5g/kg
Talc (CAS# 14807-96-6)	Filler	Balance to 100% w/w

Table 4 - 50g/kg metaldehyde + 1.5g/kg imidacloprid granular composition

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Ingredient	Role	Concentration
Metaldehyde (CAS# 108-62-3) technical material, typically 98%	Active molluscicidal ingredient	51.0g/kg (to yield 50g/kg on 100% basis)
Imidacloprid (CAS# 138261-41- 3) technical material, typically 98%	Active insecticidal ingredient	1.53g/kg (to yield 1.5g/kg on 100% basis)
Yeast (CAS# 68876-77-7)	Bait attractant	10g/kg
Canola oil (CAS# 120962-03-0)	Bait attractant	10g/kg
Wheat flour (CAS# 130498-22-5) and Wheat bran (CAS# N/a) or other cereal content	Bait attractant	~800g/kg
Polyhydroxymethyl urea (CAS# 1000-82-4)	Binder	57g/kg
Calcium stearate (CAS# 1592- 23-0)	Binder/conditioner	3g/kg
Brilliant green dye (CAS# 633- 03-4)	Pigment/dye	5g/kg
Talc (CAS# 14807-96-6)	Filler	Balance to 100% w/w

Table 5 - 100g/kg metaldehyde + 30g/kg fipronil granular composition

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Ingredient	Role	Concentration
Metaldehyde (CAS# 108-62- 3) technical material, typically 98%	Active molluscicidal ingredient	102.0g/kg (to yield 100g/kg on 100% basis)
Fipronil (CAS# 120068-37-3) technical material, typically 98%	Active insecticidal ingredient	30.6g/kg (to yield 30g/kg on 100% basis)
Yeast (CAS# 68876-77-7)	Bait attractant	10g/kg
Canola oil (CAS# 120962-03- 0)	Bait attractant	10g/kg
Wheat flour (CAS# 13049822-5) and Wheat bran (CAS# N/a) or other cereal content	Bait attractant	~720g/kg
Polyhydroxymethyl urea (CAS# 1000-82-4)	Binder	57g/kg
Calcium stearate (CAS# 1592-23-0)	Binder/conditioner	3g/kg
Brilliant green dye (CAS# 633- 03-4)	Pigment/dye	5g/kg
Talc (CAS# 14807-96-6)	Filler	Balance to 100% w/w

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Generally there is no restriction on the metaldehyde concentration of the granular composition in an administrative context, with all metaldehydebased products reporting to schedule 6 of the poisons standard when the concentration thereof is above 2%.

Metaldehyde content may also be lifted whilst still experiencing the mollusc and/or insect mortality rates expected. Additionally this would impart economies of reduced manufacturing, packaging, storage, handling and the like per unit area of application with reduced matrix ingredient requirement to carry the active ingredients

Testing of the efficacy of the above embodiments of the granular composition against snails was conducted (see Example 5). Testing of efficacy was also conducted satisfactorily against crickets and wood cockroaches.

All of the above embodiments displayed good palatability and delivered the desired pest mortality.

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Example 5 - Efficacy trials of the Example 4 embodiments on white conical snail:

1. Metakill Imidacloprid variant pellet (IAS16271) (Metaldehyde 50g/kg +

Imidacloprid 1.5g/kg)

2. Metakill Thiamethoxam variant pellet (IAS16272) (Metaldehyde 50g/kg +

Thiamethoxam 1.5g/kg)

3. Metakill Fipronil High Load variant pellet (IAS17012) (Metaldehyde 100g/kg + Fipronil 30g/kg)

Summary:

1. HDPE container with holes was used.

2. Each container consists of 1 target pest, 5 pellets of product and an alternative food source (lettuce)

3. A total of 10 trials for each product was done, same as with control (no presence of pellet)

4. Survival of the snails was observed each day for 5 days.

5. Containers are sprayed with water each day.

Conclusion:

· Control samples are all alive after 6 days - 0% fatality • Thiamethoxam variant: 100% fatality after 24 hrs.

• Imidacloprid variant: 80% effective after 24hrs, 100% fatality after 5 days • High load variant: 60% effective after 24 hrs. 90% effective after 48hrs,

100% fatality after 5 days.

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Target Pest: White Conical Snail

Control (no pellets)	Thu	Fri	Mon	Tue
24 hrs	48 hrs	5 days	6 days
1	C1	A	A	A	A
2	C2	A	A	A	A
3	C3	A	A	A	A
4	C4	A	A	A	A
5	C5	A	A	A	A
6	C6	A	A	A	A
7	C7	A	A	A	A
8	C8	A	A	A	A
9	C9	A	A	A	A
10	C10	A	A	A	A

Thiamethoxam	Thu	Fri	Mon	Tue
variant		24 hrs	48 hrs	5 days	6 days
1	T1	D	D	D	D
2	T2	D	D	D	D
3	T3	D	D	D	D
4	T4	D	D	D	D
5	T5	D	D	D	D
6	T6	D	D	D	D
7	T7	D	D	D	D
8	T8	D	D	D	D
9	T9	D	D	D	D
10	T10	D	D	D	D

Imidaclopr id variant	Thu	Fri	Mon	Tue
24 hrs	48 hrs	5 days	6 days
1	11	D	D	D	D
2	I2	A	A	D	D
3	I3	A	A	D	D
4	I4	D	D	D	D
5	I5	D	D	D	D
6	I6	D	D	D	D
7	I7	D	D	D	D
8	I8	D	D	D	D
9	I9	D	D	D	D
10	110	D	D	D	D

Legend: A-Alive Start: 1/2/2017 7:00AM

D - Dead End: 7/2/2017 7:00AM

High Load	Thu	Fri	Mon	Tue
variant		24 hrs	48 hrs	5 days	6 days
1	H1	D	D	D	D
2	H2	A	D	D	D
3	H3	D	D	D	D
4	H4	A	A	D	D
5	H5	D	D	D	D
6	H6	D	D	D	D
7	H7	D	D	D	D
8	H8	A	D	D	D
9	H9	D	D	D	D
10	H10	A	D	D	D

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Example 6 - Efficacy trials of the Example 4 embodiments with target species such as cockroach and crickets

Products used for trials:

Code	Details	Active/ loading
1	Control	no pellets
2	Metakil placebo pellets (IAS17048)	no actives
3	Metakil Imidacloprid variant pellet (IAS16271)	(Metaldehyde 50g/kg + Imidacloprid 1.5g/kg)
4	Metakil Thiamethoxam variant pellet (IAS16272)	(Metaldehyde 50g/kg + Thiamethoxam 1.5g/kg)
5	Metakil High Load variant pellet (IAS17012)	(Metaldehyde 100g/kg + Fipronil 30g/kg)
6	Metakil normal variant pellet (B# 14138)	(Metaldehyde 50g/kg + Fipronil 15g/kg)
7	Metaldehyde only pellets (option) (IAS17036)	(Metaldehyde 50g/kg)

Conditions:

1. HDPE containers covered with flyscreen and fixed using with rubber bands were used.

2. Each container consists of 1 target pest, 5 pellets of product and an alternative food source

3. A total of 5 trials for each product was done, same as with control (no presence of pellet)

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

4. Survival of the target species was observed for 5 days at ambient conditions.

5. Containers were sprayed with water and replenished with food source each day.

Results:

• Control samples : All are alive after 5 days - 0% fatality for both target species • Metakil placebo pellets (no actives):

Cockroach - 40% effective after 24hrs. 60% fatality after 5 days,

Crickets - 20% effective after 24hrs. 40% fatality after 5 days.

• Metakil Imidacloprid variant pellet:

Cockroach - 60% effective after 24hrs. 100% fatality after 5 days

Crickets - 60% effective after 24hrs, 80% effective after 96h, 100% fatality after 5 days • Metakil Thiamethoxam variant pellet:

Cockroach - 60% effective after 24hrs. 100% fatality after 5 days.

Cricket - 60% effective after 24hrs. 80% effective after 72hrs, 100% fatality after 5 days • Metakil High load variant pellet:

Cockroach and Crickets - 100% fatality after 24hrs.

• Metakil Normal variant pellet:

Cockroach - 60% effective after 24hrs, 80% effective after 48hrs. 100% fatality after 96 hrs.

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Crickets - 80% fatality after 24hrs. 100% fatality after 48hrs.

• Metakil - metaldehyde only variant:

Cockroach - no effect on target species up to 72hrs, with 40% fatality after 96hrs. same results after 5 days.

Cricket - no effect on target species up to 72hrs, with 80% fatality after 96hrs with same results after 5days.

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Legend: D = Dead A = Alive

Date/ Time started: 28/3/17; 1300H____________

	Target: Cockroach	Target: Cricket
1. Control	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After
(no pellets)	24h	48h	72h	96h	120h	24h	48h	72h	96h	120h
1.1	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A
1.2	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A
1.3	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A
1.4	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A
1.5	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A
% EFFECTIVE	0%	0%
2. Placebo pellets	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After
(no active -	24h	48h	72h	96h	120h	24h	48h	72h	96h	120h
IAS17048)
2.1	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A
2.2	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	D
2.3	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D
2.4	A	A	A	A	D	A	A	A	A	A
2.5	D	D	D	D	D	A	A	A	A	A
%EFFECTIVE	40%	40%	40%	40%	60%	20%	20%	20%	20%	40%
3. Imidacloprid	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After
variant	24h	48h	72h	96h	120h	24h	48h	72h	96h	120h
(IAS16271)
3.1	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D
3.2	A	A	A	A	D	D	D	D	D	D
3.3	D	D	D	D	D	A	A	A	D	D
3.4	D	D	D	D	D	A	A	A	A	D
3.5	A	A	A	A	D	D	D	D	D	D
% EFFECTIVE	60%	60%	60%	60%	100%	60%	60%	60%	80%	100%
4. Thiamethoxam	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After
variant	24h	48h	72h	96h	120h	24h	48h	72h	96h	120h
(IAS16272)
4.1	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

4.2	A	A	A	A	D	A	A	A	A	D
4.3	D	D	D	D	D	A	A	D	D	D
4.4	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D
4.5	A	A	A	A	D	D	D	D	D	D
% EFFECTIVE	60%	60%	60%	60%	100%	60%	60%	80%	80%	100%
5. High Load	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After
variant	24h	48h	72h	96h	120h	24h	48h	72h	96h	120h
(IAS17012)
5.1	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D
5.2	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D
5.3	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D
5.4	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D
5.5	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D
% EFFECTIVE	100%	100%
6. Metakil normal	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After
variant (B# 14038)	24h	48h	72h	96h	120h	24h	48h	72h	96h	120h
6.1	A	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D
6.2	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D
6.3	D	D	D	D	D	A	D	D	D	D
6.4	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D
6.5	A	A	A	D	D	D	D	D	D	D
% EFFECTIVE	60%	80%	80%	100%	100%	80%	100%	100%	100%	100%
7. Metaldehyde	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After	After
pellet	24h	48h	72h	96h	120h	24h	48h	72h	96h	120h
variant (IAS17036)
7.1	A	A	A	D	D	A	A	A	A	A
7.2	A	A	A	D	D	A	A	A	D	D
7.3	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	D	D
7.4	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	D	D
7.5	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	D	D
% EFFECTIVE	0%	0%	0%	40%	40%	0%	0%	0%	80%	80%

Conclusion

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 • Metakil variants efficacy rating per target specie :

Cockroach: 5>6>3>4>7 Cricket: 5>6>4>3>7 • Metakil high load variant is 100% effective after 1 day for both species compared to the normal variant which is 100% effective after 4 days for cockroach and 2 days for crickets. Also shows that cockroaches are more resilient than crickets.

• Metaldehyde Fipronil variant is more effective compared to the Imidacloprid or Thiomethoxam variants.

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Example 7 - Further Embodiments of a Granular Composition

Below are provided a number of further embodiments of the granular composition of the invention. These embodiments include the carbamate molluscicide methiocarb or an inorganic molluscicide (e.g., an iron salt in the form of a sulphate or phosphate salt, or an iron chelate in the form of an EDTA complex).

These embodiments serve to also demonstrate, in addition to different active ingredients, alternative dye/pigment (e.g., methiocarb must be coloured blue and metaldehyde green as per Australian pesticide regulations) and filler.

Methiocarb and Fipronil

Ingredient	Role	Concentration
Methiocarb (CAS# 2032-65-7) technical material, typically 98%	Active molluscicidal ingredient	28.1 g/kg (to yield 27.5g/kg on 100% basis)
Fipronil (CAS# 120068-37-3) technical material, typically 98%	Active insecticidal ingredient	1.53g/kg (to yield 1.5g/kg on 100% basis)
From amongst: Canola oil (CAS# 120962-03-0); Yeast (CAS# 68876-77-7); Wheat flour (CAS# 130498-22-5) and Wheat bran (CAS# N/a) or other cereal content	Bait attractant	~740g/kg
From amongst: Polyhydroxymethyl urea (CAS# 1000-82-4); Calcium stearate (CAS# 1592-23-0)	Binder	~60g/kg
Brilliant blue dye (CAS# 3844-45-9)	Pigment/dye	~5g/kg
From amongst: Talc (CAS# 14807-96-6); Silica (CAS# 7631-86-9); Kaolin (CAS# 1332-58-7); Bentonite (CAS# 1302-78-9); Additional bait attractant	Filler	Balance to 100% w/w

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

Ferric EDTA and Imidacloprid

Ingredient	Role	Concentration
Ferric EDTA (CAS# 17099-81-9) technical material, typically 98%	Active molluscicidal ingredient	75.0g/kg (to yield 60.0g/kg on 100% basis)
Imidacloprid (CAS# 138261-41-3) technical material, typically 98%	Active insecticidal ingredient	20.4g/kg (to yield 20.0g/kg on 100% basis)
From amongst: Canola oil (CAS# 120962-03-0); Yeast (CAS# 68876-77-7); Wheat flour (CAS# 130498-22-5) and Wheat bran (CAS# N/a) or other cereal content	Bait attractant	~740g/kg
From amongst: Polyhydroxymethyl urea (CAS# 1000-82-4); Calcium stearate (CAS# 1592-23-0)	Binder	~60g/kg
Ponceau 4R dye (CAS# 2611-82-7)	Pigment/dye	~5g/kg
From amongst: Talc (CAS# 14807-96-6); Silica (CAS# 7631-86-9); Kaolin (CAS# 1332-58-7); Bentonite (CAS# 1302-78-9); Additional bait attractant	Filler	Balance to 100% w/w

Iron Phosphate and Thiamethoxam

Ingredient	Role	Concentration
Ferric phosphate dihydrate (CAS# 13463-10-0) technical material, typically 94%	Active molluscicidal ingredient	36.7g/kg (to yield 28.0g/kg on 100% anhydrous basis)
Thiamethoxam (CAS# 153719-23-4) technical material, typically 97%	Active insecticidal ingredient	15.5g/kg (to yield 15.0g/kg on 100% basis)
From amongst: Canola oil (CAS# 120962-03-0); Yeast (CAS# 68876-77-7); Wheat flour (CAS# 130498-22-5) and Wheat bran (CAS# N/a) or other cereal content	Bait attractant	~740g/kg
From amongst: Polyhydroxymethyl urea (CAS# 1000-82-4); Calcium stearate (CAS# 1592-23-0)	Binder	~60g/kg
From amongst: Talc (CAS# 14807-96-6); Silica (CAS# 7631-86-9); Kaolin (CAS# 1332-58-7); Bentonite (CAS# 1302-78-9); Additional bait attractant	Filler	Balance to 100% w/w

Claims

1. A granular composition for preventing and/or controlling a mollusc and/or insect infestation comprising:

(a) a molluscicidal agent;

(b) an insecticidal agent; and (c) a binder.

2. The granular composition of Claim 1, wherein the molluscicidal agent is selected from the group consisting of a cyclic ketone, a carbamate, a strobilurin, a metal salt, a metal chelate, a spinosyn mixture, a chloronitrophenol, an organometal, a morpholine, a nereistoxin analogue, a pyridine, a plant-based molluscicide and any combination thereof.

3. The granular composition of Claim 2, wherein the molluscicidal agent is selected from the group consisting of a cyclic ketone, a carbamate, a metal salt, a metal chelate and any combination thereof.

4. The granular composition of Claim 3, wherein the molluscicidal agent is selected from the group consisting of metaldehyde, methiocarb, an iron salt, an iron chelate and any combination thereof.

5. The granular composition of Claim 1, wherein the insecticidal agent is selected from the group consisting of a carbamate, a neonicotinoid, a

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 phenylpyrazole, a pyrethrin, a pyrethroid, a macrocyclic lactone, an organophosphate, a pyrimidinamine insecticide, a pyrrole insecticide, a quaternary ammonium insecticide, a sulfoximine insecticide, a tetramic acid insecticide, a tetronic acid insecticide, an urea insecticide, a zwitterionic insecticide and any combination thereof.

6. The granular composition of Claim 5, wherein the insecticidal agent is selected from the group consisting of a neonicotinoid, a phenylpyrazole and any combination thereof.

7. The granular composition of Claim 6, wherein the insecticidal agent is selected from the group consisting of fipronil, thiamethoxam, imidacloprid and any combination thereof.

8. The granular composition of any one of the preceding claims, wherein the binder is or comprises calcium stearate and/or polyhydroxymethyl urea.

9. The granular composition of any one of the preceding claims, further comprising an attractant.

10. The granular composition of any one of the preceding claims, wherein the granular composition is substantially water resistant.

11. A method for preventing and/or controlling a mollusc and/or insect

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 infestation which includes the step of administering an effective amount of the granular composition of any one of Claims 1 to 10 to a target area to thereby prevent and/or control the mollusc and/or insect infestation.

12. A method of preparing a granular composition for the control and/or prevention of a mollusc and/or insect infestation, said method including the steps of:

to thereby prepare the granular composition.

13. The method of Claim 12, wherein the molluscicidal agent is selected from the group consisting of a cyclic ketone, a carbamate, a strobilurin, a metal salt, a metal chelate, a spinosyn mixture, a chloronitrophenol, an organometal, a morpholine, a nereistoxin analogue, a pyridine, a plant-based molluscicide and any combination thereof.

14. The method of Claim 13, wherein the molluscicidal agent is selected from the group consisting of a cyclic ketone, a carbamate, a metal salt, a metal chelate and any combination thereof.

15. The method of Claim 14, wherein the molluscicidal agent is selected from the group consisting of metaldehyde, methiocarb, an iron salt, an iron

2018204615 25 Jun 2018 chelate and any combination thereof.

16. The method of any one of Claims 12 to 15, wherein the insecticidal agent is selected from the group consisting of a carbamate, a neonicotinoid, a

5 phenylpyrazole, a pyrethrin, a pyrethroid, a macrocyclic lactone, an organophosphate, a pyrimidinamine insecticide, a pyrrole insecticide, a quaternary ammonium insecticide, a sulfoximine insecticide, a tetramic acid insecticide, a tetronic acid insecticide, an urea insecticide, a zwitterionic insecticide and any combination thereof.

17. The method of Claim 16, wherein the insecticidal agent is selected from the group consisting of a neonicotinoid, a phenylpyrazole and any combination thereof.

15

18. The method of Claim 17, wherein the insecticidal agent is selected from the group consisting of fipronil, thiamethoxam, imidacloprid and any combination thereof.

19. The method of any one of Claims 12 to 18, wherein the binder is or 20 comprises calcium stearate and/or polyhydroxymethyl urea.

20. The method of any one of Claims 12 to 19, wherein the granular composition is substantially water resistant.

2018204615 25 Jun 2018

21. The method of any one of Claims 12 to 20, wherein the mixture of step (a) is granulated, at least in part, by extrusion granulation.

22. A granular composition prepared by the method of any one of Claims

5 12to21.