Abstract:
A pesticidal composition comprises a synergistically effective amount of an ecdysone receptor agonist compound and a pesticide selected from N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I), N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridine-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)sulfinyl)propanamide (II), or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof. A method of controlling pests comprises applying the pesticidal composition near a population of pests. A method of protecting a plant from infestation and attack by insects comprises contacting the plant with the synergistic pesticidal composition.

Description:
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION 
     This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 61/894,137, filed Oct. 22, 2013, the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated herein in its entirety by this reference. 
    
    
     TECHNICAL FIELD 
     This disclosure relates to the field of compounds having pesticidal utility against pests in Phyla Nematoda, Arthropoda, and/or Mollusca, processes to produce such compounds and intermediates used in such processes. These compounds may be used, for example, as nematicides, acaricides, miticides, and/or molluscicides. 
     BACKGROUND 
     Controlling pest populations is essential to human health, modern agriculture, food storage, and hygiene. There are more than ten thousand species of pests that cause losses in agriculture and the world-wide agricultural losses amount to billions of U.S. dollars each year. Accordingly, there exists a continuous need for new pesticides and for methods of producing and using such pesticides. 
     The Insecticide Resistance Action Committee (IRAC) has classified insecticides into categories based on the best available evidence of the mode of action of such insecticides. Insecticides in the IRAC Mode of Action Group 18 are ecdysone receptor agonists, such as diacylhydrazine compounds. The insecticides in this class are believed to mimic the moulting hormone, ecdysone, which induces a moult of the affected insects. Examples of insecticides in this class are chromafenozide, halofenozide, methoxyfenozide, tebufenozide, and fufenozide. 
     Although the rotational application of insecticides having different modes of action may be adopted for good pest management practice, this approach does not necessarily give satisfactory insect control. Furthermore, even though combinations of insecticides have been studied, a high synergistic action has not always been found. 
     BRIEF SUMMARY 
     As used herein, the term “synergistic effect” or grammatical variations thereof means and includes a cooperative action encountered in a combination of two or more active compounds in which the combined activity of the two or more active compounds exceeds the sum of the activity of each active compound alone. 
     The term “synergistically effective amount,” as used herein, means and includes an amount of two or more active compounds that provides a synergistic effect defined above. 
     The term “pesticidally effective amount,” as used herein, means and includes an amount of active pesticide that causes an adverse effect to the at least one pest, wherein the adverse effect may include deviations from natural development, killing, regulation, or the like. 
     As used herein, the term “control” or grammatical variations thereof means and includes regulating the number of living pests or regulating the number of viable eggs of the pests or both. 
     The term “ecdysone receptor agonist compound,” as used herein, means and includes any insecticides that are classified by the Insecticide Resistance Action Committee (IRAC), based on the best available evidence of the mode of action, to be within the IRAC Mode of Action Group 18. 
     In one particular embodiment, a pesticidal composition comprises a synergistically effective amount of an ecdysone receptor agonist compound in combination with a pesticide selected from N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I), N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)sulfinyl)propanamide (II), or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof. 
     
       
                 
         
             
             
         
      
     
     It is appreciated that a pesticide selected from N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio) propanamide (I), N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl) sulfinyl)propanamide (II), or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof may be oxidized to the corresponding sulfone in the presence of oxygen. 
     As shown in the EXAMPLES, the existence of synergistic effect is determined using the method described in Colby S. R., “Calculating Synergistic and Antagonistic Responses of Herbicide Combinations,” Weeds, 1967, 15, 20-22. 
     Surprisingly, it has been found that the pesticidal composition of the present disclosure has superior pest control at lower levels of the combined concentrations of ecdysone receptor agonist compound and the pesticide employed than that which may be achieved when the ecdysone receptor agonist compound and the pesticide are applied alone. In other words, the synergistic pesticidal composition is not a mere admixture of two active compounds resulting in the aggregation of the properties of the active compounds employed in the composition. 
     In some embodiments, the pesticidal compositions may comprise a synergistically effective amount of diacylhydrazine-based compound in combination with a pesticide selected from N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio) propanamide (I), N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl) sulfinyl)propanamide (II), or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof. 
     In other embodiments, the pesticidal compositions may comprise a synergistically effective amount of a pesticide in combination with at least one of chromafenozide, halofenozide, methoxyfenozide, tebufenozide, and fufenozide. 
     In further embodiments, the pesticidal compositions may comprise a synergistically effective amount of methoxyfenozide (3-methoxy-2-methylbenzoic acid 2-(3,5-dimethylbenzoyl)-2-(1,1-dimethylethyl)hydrazide) in combination with a pesticide selected from N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I), N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-(3,3,3-trifluoropropyl) sulfinyl)propanamide (II), or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof. 
     TABLE 1A shows weight ratios of the pesticide (I), (II), or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound in the synergistic pesticidal compositions. In some embodiments, the weight ratio of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be between about 20:1 and about 1:20. In some embodiments, the weight ratio of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be between about 15:1 and about 1:15. In some embodiments, the weight ratio of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be between about 10:1 and about 1:10. In some embodiments, the weight ratio of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be between about 5:1 and about 1:5. In some embodiments, the weight ratio of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be between about 4:1 and about 1:4. In some embodiments, the weight ratio of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be between about 3:1 and about 1:3. In some embodiments, the weight ratio of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be between about 2:1 and about 1:2. In some embodiments, the weight ratio of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be about 1:1. Additionally, the weight ratio limits of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound in the aforementioned embodiments may be interchangeable. By way of non-limiting example, the weight ratio of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be between about 1:3 and about 20:1. 
     
       
         
               
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 1A 
               
               
                   
               
               
                   
                 Range of the Weight Ratio of 
               
               
                 No. 
                 Pesticide I or II to Ecdysone Receptor Agonist Compound 
               
               
                   
               
             
             
               
                 1 
                 20:1 to 1:20 
               
               
                 2 
                 15:1 to 1:15 
               
               
                 3 
                 10:1 to 1:10 
               
               
                 4 
                 5:1 to 1:5 
               
               
                 5 
                 4:1 to 1:4 
               
               
                 6 
                 3:1 to 1:3 
               
               
                 7 
                 2:1 to 1:2 
               
               
                 8 
                 1:1 
               
               
                   
               
             
          
         
       
     
     Weight ratios of the pesticide (I), (II), or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound envisioned to be synergistic pesticidal compositions may be depicted as X:Y; wherein X is the parts by weight of the pesticide (I), (II), or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof, and Y is the parts by weight of the ecdysone receptor agonist compound. The numerical range of the parts by weight for X is 0&lt;X≦20 and the parts by weight for Y is 0&lt;Y≦20 as shown in TABLE 1B. By way of non-limiting example, the weight ratio of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be about 20:1. 
     
       
         
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
             
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 1B 
               
               
                   
               
             
             
               
                 Ecdysone 
                 20 
                 X, Y 
                   
                 X, Y 
                   
                   
                   
                   
                   
               
               
                 receptor 
                 15 
                 X, Y 
                 X, Y 
                   
                 X, Y 
               
               
                 agonist 
                 10 
                 X, Y 
                   
                 X, Y 
               
               
                 com- 
                 5 
                 X, Y 
                 X, Y 
                 X, Y 
                 X, Y 
               
               
                 pound (Y) 
                 4 
                 X, Y 
                   
                 X, Y 
                   
                 X, Y 
                   
                 X, Y 
               
               
                 Parts by 
                 3 
                 X, Y 
                 X, Y 
                   
                 X, Y 
                 X, Y 
                 X, Y 
                   
                 X, Y 
               
               
                 Weight 
                 2 
                 X, Y 
                   
                 X, Y 
                   
                 X, Y 
                   
                 X, Y 
               
               
                   
                 1 
                 X, Y 
                 X, Y 
                 X, Y 
                 X, Y 
                 X, Y 
                 X, Y 
                 X, Y 
                 X, Y 
               
               
                   
                   
                 1 
                 2 
                 3 
                 4 
                 5 
                 10 
                 15 
                 20 
               
             
          
           
               
                 Pesticide (I or II) 
               
               
                 (X) Parts by Weight 
               
               
                   
               
             
          
         
       
     
     Ranges of weight ratios of the pesticide (I), (II), or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound envisioned to be synergistic pesticidal compositions may be depicted as X 1 :Y 1  to X 2 :Y 2 , wherein X and Y are defined as above. In one particular embodiment, the range of weight ratios may be X 1 :Y 1  to X 2 :Y 2 , wherein X 1 &gt;Y 1  and X 2 &lt;Y 2 . By way of non-limiting example, the range of weight ratios of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be between about 3:1 and about 1:3. In some embodiments, the range of weight ratios may be X 1 :Y 1  to X 2 :Y 2 , wherein X 1 &gt;Y 1  and X 2 &gt;Y 2 . By way of non-limiting example, the range of weight ratios of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be between about 15:1 and about 3:1. In further embodiments, the range of weight ratios may be X j :Y 1  to X 2 :Y 2 , wherein X j &lt;Y 1  and X 2 &lt;Y 2 . By way of non-limiting example, the range of weight ratios of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be between about 1:3 and about 1:20. 
     TABLE 1C shows further weight ratios of the pesticide (I), (II), or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound in the synergistic pesticidal compositions, according to particular embodiments of the present disclosure. In some particular embodiments, the weight ratio of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be no more than about 1:32. In further embodiments, the weight ratio of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be no more than about 1:8. In further embodiments, the weight ratio of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be no more than about 1:4. In further embodiments, the weight ratio of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be no more than about 1:2.5. In further embodiments, the weight ratio of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be no more than about 1:2. In further embodiments, the weight ratio of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be no more than about 2:1. In yet further embodiments, the weight ratio of the pesticide to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound may be no more than about 8:1. 
     
       
         
               
               
               
             
               
               
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 1C 
               
               
                   
               
               
                   
                 Dose Rate of Ecdysone 
                 Weight Ratio of 
               
               
                 Dose Rate Of 
                 Receptor Agonist 
                 Pesticide (I or II) to 
               
               
                 Pesticide (I or 
                 Compound 
                 Ecdysone Receptor Agonist 
               
               
                 II) (weight %) 
                 (weight %) 
                 Compound 
               
               
                   
               
             
             
               
                   
               
             
          
           
               
                 0.000625 
                 0.02 
                  ≦1:32 
               
               
                 0.0001531 
                 0.0050 
                  ≦1:32 
               
               
                 0.000625 
                 0.0050 
                 ≦1:8 
               
               
                 0.0001531 
                 0.00125 
                 ≦1:8 
               
               
                 0.000625 
                 0.0025 
                 ≦1:4 
               
               
                 0.002 
                 0.005 
                     ≦1:2.5 
               
               
                 0.0025 
                 0.0050 
                 ≦1:2 
               
               
                 0.000625 
                 0.00125 
                 ≦1:2 
               
               
                 0.0001531 
                 0.0003125 
                 ≦1:2 
               
               
                 0.0025 
                 0.00125 
                 ≦2:1 
               
               
                 0.000625 
                 0.0003125 
                 ≦2:1 
               
               
                 0.0025 
                 0.0003125 
                 ≦8:1 
               
               
                   
               
             
          
         
       
     
     The weight ratio of the pesticide (I), (II), or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof to the ecdysone receptor agonist compound in the synergistic pesticidal composition may be varied and different from those described in TABLE 1A, TABLE 1B, and TABLE 1C. One skilled in the art recognizes that the synergistic effective amount of the combination of active compounds may vary accordingly to various prevailing conditions. Non-limiting examples of such prevailing conditions may include the type of pests, the type of crops, the mode of application, the application timing, the weather conditions, the soil conditions, the topographical character, or the like. It is understood that one skilled in the art may readily determine the synergistic effective amount of the ecdysone receptor agonist compound and the pesticide accordingly to the prevailing conditions. 
     In some embodiments, the pesticidal composition may comprise a synergistically effective amount of an ecdysone receptor agonist composition compound in combination with a pesticide selected from N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I), N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)sulfinyl)propanamide (II) or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof, and a phytologically-acceptable inert carrier (e.g., solid carrier, or liquid carrier). 
     In further embodiments, the pesticidal composition may further comprise at least one additive selected from a surfactant, a stabilizer, an emetic agent, a disintegrating agent, an antifoaming agent, a wetting agent, a dispersing agent, a binding agent, dye, filler, or combinations thereof. 
     In particular embodiments, each of the active compounds (an ecdysone receptor agonist compound and a pesticide selected from N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I), N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)sulfinyl)propanamide (II), or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof) may be formulated separately as a wettable powder, emulsifiable concentrate, aqueous or liquid flowable, suspension concentrate or any one of the conventional formulations used for pesticides, and then tank-mixed in the field with water or other liquid for application as a liquid spray mixture. When desired, the separately formulated pesticides may also be applied sequentially. 
     In some embodiments, the synergistic pesticidal composition may be formulated into a more concentrated primary composition, which is then diluted with water or other diluent before use. In such embodiments, the synergistic pesticidal composition may further comprise a surface active agent. 
     In one particular embodiment, the method of protecting a plant from infestation and attack by insects comprises contacting the plant with a pesticidal composition comprising a synergistically effective amount of an ecdysone receptor agonist compound in combination with a pesticide selected from N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I), N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)sulfinyl)propanamide (II), or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof. 
     In some embodiments, the pesticidal compositions may be in the form of solid. Non-limiting examples of the solid forms may include power, dust or granular formulations. 
     In other embodiments, the pesticidal compositions may be in the form of liquid formulation. Examples of the liquid forms may include, but not limited to, dispersion, suspension, emulsion or solution in appropriate liquid carrier. In particular embodiments, the synergistic pesticidal compositions may be in the form of liquid dispersion, wherein the synergistic pesticidal compositions may be dispersed in water or other agriculturally suitable liquid carrier. 
     In certain embodiments, the synergistic pesticidal compositions may be in the form of solution in an appropriate organic solvent. In one embodiment, the spray oils, which are widely used in agricultural chemistry, may be used as the organic solvent for the synergistic pesticidal compositions. 
     In one particular embodiment, the method of controlling pests comprises applying a pesticidal composition near a population of pests, wherein the pesticidal composition comprises a synergistically effective amount of ecdysone receptor agonist compound in combination with a pesticide selected from N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I), N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)sulfinyl)propanamide (II), or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof. 
     In some embodiments, the method of controlling pests comprises applying a pesticidal composition near a population of pests, wherein the pesticidal composition comprises a synergistically effective amount of a diacylhydrazine-based compound in combination with a pesticide selected from N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I), N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)sulfinyl)propanamide (II) or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof. 
     In other embodiments, the method of controlling pests comprises applying a pesticidal composition near a population of pests, wherein the pesticidal composition comprises a synergistically effective amount of the pesticide in combination with at least one of chromafenozide, halofenozide, methoxyfenozide, tebufenozide, and fufenozide. 
     In further embodiments, the method of controlling pests comprises applying a pesticidal composition near a population of pests, wherein the pesticidal composition comprises a synergistically effective amount of methoxyfenozide in combination with a pesticide selected from N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I), N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)sulfinyl) propanamide (II) or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof. 
     The control of pests may be achieved by applying a pesticidally effective amount of the synergistic pesticidal compositions in form of sprays, topical treatment, gels, seed coatings, microcapsulations, systemic uptake, baits, eartags, boluses, foggers, fumigants aerosols, dusts, or the like. 
     These disclosed pesticidal compositions may be used, for example, as nematicides, acaricides, miticides, and/or molluscicides. 
     The pesticidal composition of the present disclosure may be used to control a wide variety of insects. As a non-limiting example, in one or more embodiments, the pesticidal composition may be used to control one or more members of at least one of Phylum Arthropoda, Phylum Nematoda, Subphylum Chelicerata, Subphylum Myriapoda, Subphylum Hexapoda, Class Insecta, Class Arachnida, and Class Symphyla. In at least some embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control one or more members of at least one of Class Insecta and Class Arachnida. 
     As a non-limiting example, in one or more embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control one or more members of at least one of Phylum Arthropoda, Phylum Nematoda, Subphylum Chelicerata, Subphylum Myriapoda, Subphylum Hexapoda, Class Insecta, Class Arachnida, and Class Symphyla. In at least some embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control one or more members of at least one of Class Insecta and Class Arachnida. 
     In additional embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control members of the Order Coleoptera (beetles) including, but not limited to,  Acanthoscelides  spp. (weevils),  Acanthoscelides obtectus  (common bean weevil),  Agrilus planipennis  (emerald ash borer),  Agriotes  spp. (wireworms),  Anoplophora glabripennis  (Asian longhorned beetle),  Anthonomus  spp. (weevils),  Anthonomus grandis  (boll weevil),  Aphidius  spp.,  Apion  spp. (weevils),  Apogonia  spp. (grubs),  Ataenius spretulus  (Black Turfgrass Ataenius),  Atomaria linearis  (pygmy mangold beetle),  Aulacophore  spp.,  Bothynoderes punctiventris  (beet root weevil),  Bruchus  spp. (weevils),  Bruchus pisorum  (pea weevil),  Cacoesia  spp.,  Callosobruchus maculatus  (southern cow pea weevil),  Carpophilus hemipteras  (dried fruit beetle),  Cassida vittata, Cerosterna  spp.,  Cerotoma  spp. (chrysomelids),  Cerotoma trifurcata  (bean leaf beetle),  Ceutorhynchus  spp. (weevils),  Ceutorhynchus assimilis  (cabbage seedpod weevil),  Ceutorhynchus napi  (cabbage curculio),  Chaetocnema  spp. (chrysomelids),  Colaspis  spp. (soil beetles),  Conoderus scalaris, Conoderus stigmosus, Conotrachelus nenuphar  (plum curculio),  Cotinus nitidis  (Green June beetle),  Crioceris asparagi  (asparagus beetle),  Cryptolestes ferrugineus  (rusty grain beetle),  Cryptolestes pusillus  (flat grain beetle),  Cryptolestes turcicus  (Turkish grain beetle),  Ctenicera  spp. (wireworms),  Curculio  spp. (weevils),  Cyclocephala  spp. (grubs),  Cylindrocpturus adspersus  (sunflower stem weevil),  Deporaus marginatus  (mango leaf-cutting weevil),  Dermestes lardarius  (larder beetle),  Dermestes maculates  (hide beetle),  Diabrotica  spp. (chrysomelids),  Epilachna varivestis  (Mexican bean beetle),  Faustinus cubae, Hylobius pales  (pales weevil),  Hypera  spp. (weevils),  Hypera postica  (alfalfa weevil),  Hyperdoes  spp. (Hyperodes weevil),  Hypothenemus hampei  (coffee berry beetle),  Ips  spp. (engravers),  Lasioderma serricorne  (cigarette beetle),  Leptinotarsa decemlineata  (Colorado potato beetle),  Liogenys fuscus, Liogenys suturalis, Lissorhoptrus oryzophilus  (rice water weevil),  Lyctus  spp. (wood beetles/powder post beetles),  Maecolaspis joliveti, Megascelis  spp.,  Melanotus communis, Meligethes  spp.,  Meligethes aeneus  (blossom beetle),  Melolontha melolontha  (common European cockchafer),  Oberea brevis, Oberea linearis, Oryctes rhinoceros  (date palm beetle),  Oryzaephilus mercator  (merchant grain beetle),  Oryzaephilus surinamensis  (sawtoothed grain beetle),  Otiorhynchus  spp. (weevils),  Oulema melanopus  (cereal leaf beetle),  Oulema oryzae, Pantomorus  spp. (weevils),  Phyllophaga  spp. (May/June beetle),  Phyllophaga cuyabana  (chrysomelids),  Phynchites  spp.,  Popillia japonica  (Japanese beetle),  Prostephanus truncates  (larger grain borer),  Rhizopertha dominica  (lesser grain borer),  Rhizotrogus  spp. (European chafer),  Rhynchophorus  spp. (weevils),  Scolytus  spp. (wood beetles),  Shenophorus  spp. (Billbug),  Sitona lineatus  (pea leaf weevil),  Sitophilus  spp. (grain weevils),  Sitophilus granaries  (granary weevil),  Sitophilus oryzae  (rice weevil),  Stegobium paniceum  (drugstore beetle),  Tribolium  spp. (flour beetles),  Tribolium castaneum  (red flour beetle),  Tribolium confusum  (confused flour beetle),  Trogoderma variabile  (warehouse beetle), and  Zabrus tenebioides.    
     In other embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may also be used to control members of the Order Dermaptera (earwigs). 
     In additional embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control members of the Order Dictyoptera (cockroaches) including, but is not limited to,  Blattella germanica  (German cockroach),  Blatta orientalis  (oriental cockroach),  Parcoblatta pennylvanica, Periplaneta americana  (American cockroach),  Periplaneta australoasiae  (Australian cockroach),  Periplaneta brunnea  (brown cockroach),  Periplaneta fuliginosa  (smokybrown cockroach),  Pyncoselus suninamensis  (Surinam cockroach), and  Supella longipalpa  (brownbanded cockroach). 
     In further embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control members of the Order Diptera (true flies) including, but is not limited to,  Aedes  spp. (mosquitoes),  Agromyza frontella  (alfalfa blotch leafminer),  Agromyza  spp. (leaf miner flies),  Anastrepha  spp. (fruit flies),  Anastrepha suspensa  (Caribbean fruit fly),  Anopheles  spp. (mosquitoes),  Bactrocera  spp. (fruit flies),  Bactrocera cucurbitae  (melon fly),  Bactrocera dorsalis  (oriental fruit fly),  Ceratitis  spp. (fruit flies),  Ceratitis capitata  (Mediterranean fruit fly),  Chrysops  spp. (deer flies),  Cochliomyia  spp. (screwworms),  Contarinia  spp. (Gall midges),  Culex  spp. (mosquitoes),  Dasineura  spp. (gall midges),  Dasineura brassicae  (cabbage gall midge),  Delia  spp.,  Delia platura  (seedcorn maggot),  Drosophila  spp. (vinegar flies),  Fannia  spp. (filth flies),  Fannia canicularis  (little house fly),  Fannia scalaris  (latrine fly),  Gasterophilus intestinalis  (horse bot fly),  Gracillia perseae, Haematobia irritans  (horn fly),  Hylemyia  spp. (root maggots),  Hypoderma lineatum  (common cattle grub),  Liriomyza  spp. (leafminer flies),  Liriomyza brassica  (serpentine leafminer),  Liriomyza sativae  (vegetable leafminer),  Melophagus ovinus  (sheep ked),  Musca  spp. (muscid flies),  Musca autumnalis  (face fly),  Musca domestica  (house fly),  Oestrus ovis  (sheep bot fly),  Oscinella frit  (frit fly),  Pegomyia betae  (beet leafminer),  Phorbia  spp.,  Psila rosae  (carrot rust fly),  Rhagoletis cerasi  (cherry fruit fly),  Rhagoletis pomonella  (apple maggot),  Sitodiplosis mosellana  (orange wheat blossom midge),  Stomoxys calcitrans  (stable fly),  Tabanus  spp. (horse flies), and  Tipula  spp. (crane flies). 
     In other embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control members of the Order Hemiptera Sub-order Heteroptera (true bugs) including, but is not limited to,  Acrosternum hilare  (green stink bug),  Blissus leucopterus  (chinch bug),  Bragada hilaris, Calocoris norvegicus  (potato mirid),  Cimex hemipterus  (tropical bed bug),  Cimex lectularius  (bed bug),  Dagbertus fasciatus, Dichelops furcatus, Dysdercus suturellus  (cotton stainer),  Edessa meditabunda, Eurygaster maura  (cereal bug),  Euschistus heros, Euschistus servus  (brown stink bug),  Helopeltis antonii, Helopeltis theivora  (tea blight plantbug),  Lagynotomus  spp. (stink bugs),  Leptocorisa oratorius, Leptocorisa varicornis, Lygus  spp. (plant bugs),  Lygus hesperus  (western tarnished plant bug),  Lygus lineolaris  (tarnished plant bug),  Maconellicoccus hirsutus, Neurocolpus longirostris, Nezara viridula  (southern green stink bug),  Phytocoris  spp. (plant bugs),  Phytocoris californicus, Phytocoris relativus, Piezodorus guildinii  (redbanded stink bug),  Poecilocapsus lineatus  (fourlined plant bug),  Psallus vaccinicola, Pseudacysta perseae, Scaptocoris castanea , and  Triatoma  spp. (bloodsucking conenose bugs/kissing bugs). 
     In additional embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control members of the Order Hemiptera, Sub-orders Auchenorrhyncha (Free-living Hemipterans) and Sternorrhyncha (Plant-parasitic Hemipterans) (aphids, scales, whiteflies, leaflhoppers) including, but is not limited to,  Acrythosiphon pisum  (pea aphid),  Adelges  spp. (adelgids),  Aleurodes proletella  (cabbage whitefly),  Aleurodicus disperses, Aleurothrixus floccosus  (woolly whitefly),  Aluacaspis  spp.,  Amrasca bigutella bigutella, Aphrophora  spp. (leafhoppers),  Aonidiella aurantii  (California red scale),  Aphis  spp. (aphids),  Aphis gossypii  (cotton aphid),  Aphis pomi  (apple aphid),  Aulacorthum solani  (foxglove aphid),  Bemisia  spp. (whiteflies),  Bemisia argentifolii, Bemisia tabaci  (sweetpotato whitefly),  Brachycolus noxius  (Russian aphid),  Brachycorynella asparagi  (asparagus aphid),  Brevennia rehi, Brevicoryne brassicae  (cabbage aphid),  Ceroplastes  spp. (scales),  Ceroplastes rubens  (red wax scale),  Chionaspis  spp. (scales),  Chrysomphalus  spp. (scales),  Chrysomphalus aonidum  (Florida red scale)  Coccus  spp. (scales),  Coccus pseudomagnoliarum  (citricola scale),  Dysaphis plantaginea  (rosy apple aphid),  Empoasca  spp. (leafhoppers),  Eriosoma lanigerum  (woolly apple aphid),  Icerya purchasi  (cottony cushion scale),  Idioscopus nitidulus  (mango leafhopper),  Laodelphax striatellus  (smaller brown planthopper),  Lepidosaphes  spp.,  Macrosiphum  spp.,  Macrosiphum euphorbiae  (potato aphid),  Macrosiphum granarium  (English grain aphid),  Macrosiphum rosae  (rose aphid),  Macrosteles quadrilineatus  (aster leafhopper),  Mahanarva frimbiolata, Metopolophium dirhodum  (rose grain aphid),  Mictis longicornis, Myzus  spp.,  Myzus persicae  (green peach aphid),  Nephotettix  spp. (leafhoppers),  Nephotettix cinctipes  (green leafhopper),  Nilaparvata lugens  (brown planthopper),  Paratrioza cockerelli  (tomato psyllid),  Parlatoria pergandii  (chaff scale),  Parlatoria ziziphi  (ebony scale),  Peregrinus maidis  (corn delphacid),  Philaenus  spp. (spittlebugs),  Phylloxera vitifoliae  (grape phylloxera),  Physokermes piceae  (spruce bud scale),  Planococcus  spp. (mealybugs),  Planococcus citri  (citrus mealybug),  Planococcus ficus  (grape mealybug),  Pseudococcus  spp. (mealybugs),  Pseudococcus brevipes  (pine apple mealybug),  Quadraspidiotus perniciosus  (San Jose scale),  Rhopalosiphum  spp. (aphids),  Rhopalosiphum maidis  (corn leaf aphid),  Rhopalosiphum padi  (oat bird-cherry aphid),  Saissetia  spp. (scales),  Saissetia oleae  (black scale),  Schizaphis graminum  (greenbug),  Sitobion avenae  (English grain aphid),  Sogatella furcifera  (white-backed planthopper),  Therioaphis  spp. (aphids),  Toumeyella  spp. (scales),  Toxoptera  spp. (aphids),  Trialeurodes  spp. (whiteflies),  Trialeurodes vaporariorum  (greenhouse whitefly),  Trialeurodes abutiloneus  (bandedwing whitefly),  Unaspis  spp. (scales),  Unaspis yanonensis  (arrowhead scale), and  Zulia entreriana . In at least some embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control  Myzus persicae.    
     In other embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control members of the Order Hymenoptera (ants, wasps, and sawflies) including, but not limited to,  Acromyrrmex  spp.,  Athalia rosae, Atta  spp. (leafcutting ants),  Camponotus  spp. (carpenter ants),  Diprion  spp. (sawflies),  Formica  spp. (ants),  Iridomyrmex humilis  (Argentine ant),  Monomorium  spp.,  Monomorium minumum  (little black ant),  Monomorium pharaonis  (Pharaoh ant),  Neodiprion  spp. (sawflies),  Pogonomyrmex  spp. (harvester ants),  Polistes  spp. (paper wasps),  Solenopsis  spp. (fire ants),  Tapoinoma sessile  (odorous house ant),  Tetranomorium  spp. (pavement ants),  Vespula  spp. (yellow jackets), and  Xylocopa  spp. (carpenter bees). 
     In certain embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control members of the Order Isoptera (termites) including, but not limited to,  Coptotermes  spp.,  Coptotermes curvignathus, Coptotermes frenchii, Coptotermes formosanus  (Formosan subterranean termite),  Cornitermes  spp. (nasute termites),  Cryptotermes  spp. (drywood termites),  Heterotermes  spp. (desert subterranean termites),  Heterotermes aureus, Kalotermes  spp. (drywood termites),  Incistitermes  spp. (drywood termites),  Macrotermes  spp. (fungus growing termites),  Marginitermes  spp. (drywood termites),  Microcerotermes  spp. (harvester termites),  Microtermes obesi, Procornitermes  spp.,  Reticulitermes  spp. (subterranean termites),  Reticulitermes banyulensis, Reticulitermes grassei, Reticulitermes flavipes  (eastern subterranean termite),  Reticulitermes hageni, Reticulitermes hesperus  (western subterranean termite),  Reticulitermes santonensis, Reticulitermes speratus, Reticulitermes tibialis, Reticulitermes virginicus, Schedorhinotermes  spp., and  Zootermopsis  spp. (rotten-wood termites). 
     In additional embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control members of the Order Lepidoptera (moths and butterflies) including, but not limited to,  Achoea janata, Adoxophyes  spp.,  Adoxophyes orana, Agrotis  spp. (cutworms),  Agrotis ipsilon  (black cutworm),  Alabama argillacea  (cotton leafworm),  Amorbia cuneana, Amyelosis transitella  (navel orangeworm),  Anacamptodes defectaria, Anarsia lineatella  (peach twig borer),  Anomis sabulifera  (jute looper),  Anticarsia gemmatalis  (velvetbean caterpillar),  Archips argyrospila  (fruittree leafroller),  Archips rosana  (rose leaf roller),  Argyrotaenia  spp. (tortricid moths),  Argyrotaenia citrana  (orange tortrix),  Autographa gamma, Bonagota cranaodes, Borbo cinnara  (rice leaf folder),  Bucculatrix thurberiella  (cotton leafperforator),  Caloptilia  spp. (leaf miners),  Capua reticulana, Carposina niponensis  (peach fruit moth),  Chilo  spp.,  Chlumetia transversa  (mango shoot borer),  Choristoneura rosaceana  (obliquebanded leafroller),  Chrysodeixis  spp.,  Cnaphalocerus medinalis  (grass leafroller),  Colias  spp.,  Conpomorpha cramerella, Cossus cossus  (carpenter moth),  Crambus  spp. (Sod webworms),  Cydiafunebrana  (plum fruit moth),  Cydia molesta  (oriental fruit moth),  Cydia nignicana  (pea moth),  Cydia pomonella  (codling moth),  Darna diducta, Diaphania  spp. (stem borers),  Diatraea  spp. (stalk borers),  Diatraea saccharalis  (sugarcane borer),  Diatraea graniosella  (southwester corn borer),  Earias  spp. (bollworms),  Earias insulata  (Egyptian bollworm),  Earias vitella  (rough northern bollworm),  Ecdytopopha aurantianum, Elasmopalpus lignosellus  (lesser cornstalk borer),  Epiphysias postruttana  (light brown apple moth),  Ephestia  spp. (flour moths),  Ephestia cautella  (almond moth),  Ephestia elutella  (tobbaco moth),  Ephestia kuehniella  (Mediterranean flour moth),  Epimeces  spp.,  Epinotia aporema, Erionota thrax  (banana skipper),  Eupoecilia ambiguella  (grape berry moth),  Euxoa auxiliaris  (army cutworm),  Feltia  spp. (cutworms),  Gortyna  spp. (stemborers),  Grapholita molesta  (oriental fruit moth),  Hedylepta indicata  (bean leaf webber),  Helicoverpa  spp. (noctuid moths),  Helicoverpa armigera  (cotton bollworm),  Helicoverpa zea  (bollworm/corn earworm),  Heliothis  spp. (noctuid moths),  Heliothis virescens  (tobacco budworm),  Hellula undalis  (cabbage webworm),  Indarbela  spp. (root borers),  Keiferia lycopersicella  (tomato pinworm),  Leucinodes orbonalis  (eggplant fruit borer),  Leucoptera malifoliella, Lithocollectis  spp.,  Lobesia botrana  (grape fruit moth),  Loxagrotis  spp. (noctuid moths),  Loxagrotis albicosta  (western bean cutworm),  Lymantria dispar  (gypsy moth),  Lyonetia clerkella  (apple leaf miner),  Mahasena corbetti  (oil palm bagworm),  Malacosoma  spp. (tent caterpillars),  Mamestra brassicae  (cabbage armyworm),  Maruca testulalis  (bean pod borer),  Metisa plana  (bagworm),  Mythimna unipuncta  (true armyworm),  Neoleucinodes elegantalis  (small tomato borer),  Nymphula depunctalis  (rice caseworm),  Operophthera brumata  (winter moth),  Ostrinia nubilalis  (European corn borer),  Oxydia vesulia, Pandemis cerasana  (common currant tortrix),  Pandemis heparana  (brown apple tortrix),  Papilio demodocus, Pectinophora gossypiella  (pink bollworm),  Peridroma  spp. (cutworms),  Peridroma saucia  (variegated cutworm),  Perileucoptera coffeella  (white coffee leafminer),  Phthorimaea operculella  (potato tuber moth),  Phyllocnisitis citrella, Phyllonorycter  spp. (leafminers),  Pieris rapae  (imported cabbageworm),  Plathypena scabra, Plodia interpunctella  (Indian meal moth),  Plutella xylostella  (diamondback moth),  Polychrosis viteana  (grape berry moth),  Prays endocarps, Prays oleae  (olive moth),  Pseudaletia  spp. (noctuid moths),  Pseudaletia unipunctata  (armyworm),  Pseudoplusia includens  (soybean looper),  Rachiplusia nu, Scirpophaga incertulas, Sesamia  spp. (stemborers),  Sesamia inferens  (pink rice stem borer),  Sesamia nonagrioides, Setora nitens, Sitotroga cerealella  (Angoumois grain moth),  Sparganothis pilleriana, Spodoptera  spp. (armyworms),  Spodoptera exigua  (beet armyworm),  Spodoptera fugiperda  (fall armyworm),  Spodoptera oridania  (southern armyworm),  Synanthedon  spp. (root borers),  Thecla basilides, Thermisia gemmatalis, Tineola bisselliella  (webbing clothes moth),  Trichoplusia ni  (cabbage looper),  Tuta absoluta, Yponomeuta  spp.,  Zeuzera coffeae  (red branch borer), and  Zeuzera pyrina  (leopard moth). In at least some embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control  Spodoptera exigua.    
     The method of the present disclosure may be used to also control members of the Order Mallophaga (chewing lice) including, but not limited to,  Bovicola ovis  (sheep biting louse),  Menacanthus stramineus  (chicken body louse), and  Menopon gallinea  (common hen louse). 
     In additional embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control members of the Order Orthoptera (grasshoppers, locusts, and crickets) including, but not limited to,  Anabrus simplex  (Mormon cricket), Gryllotalpidae (mole crickets),  Locusta migratoria, Melanoplus  spp. (grasshoppers),  Microcentrum retinerve  (angularwinged katydid),  Pterophylla  spp. (kaydids),  chistocerca gregaria, Scudderia furcata  (forktailed bush katydid), and  Valanga nigricorni.    
     In other embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control members of the Order Phthiraptera (sucking lice) including, but not limited to,  Haematopinus  spp. (cattle and hog lice),  Linognathus ovillus  (sheep louse),  Pediculus humanus capitis  (human body louse),  Pediculus humanus humanus  (human body lice), and  Pthirus pubis  (crab louse). 
     In particular embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control members of the Order Siphonaptera (fleas) including, but not limited to,  Ctenocephalides canis  (dog flea),  Ctenocephalides felis  (cat flea), and  Pulex irritans  (human flea). 
     In additional embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control members of the Order Thysanoptera (thrips) including, but not limited to,  Caliothrips fasciatus  (bean thrips),  Caliothrips phaseoli, Frankliniella fusca  (tobacco thrips),  Frankliniella occidentalis  (western flower thrips),  Frankliniella shultzei, Frankliniella williamsi  (corn thrips),  Heliothtips haemorrhaidalis  (greenhouse thrips),  Riphiphorothrips cruentatus, Scirtothrips  spp.,  Scirtothrips citri  (citrus thrips),  Scirtothrips dorsalis  (yellow tea thrips),  Taeniothrips rhopalantennalis, Thrips  spp.,  Thrips tabaci  (onion thrips), and  Thrips hawaiiensis  (Hawaiian flower thrips). 
     The method of the present disclosure may be used to also control members of the Order Thysanura (bristletails) including, but not limited to,  Lepisma  spp. (silverfish) and  Thermobia  spp. (firebrats). 
     In further embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control members of the Order Acari (mites and ticks) including, but not limited to,  Acarapsis woodi  (tracheal mite of honeybees),  Acarus  spp. (food mites),  Acarus siro  (grain mite),  Aceria mangiferae  (mango bud mite),  Aculops  spp.,  Aculops lycopersici  (tomato russet mite),  Aculops pelekasi, Aculus pelekassi, Aculus schlechtendali  (apple rust mite),  Amblyomma americanum  (lone star tick),  Boophilus  spp. (ticks),  Brevipalpus obovatus  (privet mite),  Brevipalpus phoenicis  (red and black flat mite),  Demodex  spp. (mange mites),  Dermacentor  spp. (hard ticks),  Dermacentor variabilis  (american dog tick),  Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus  (house dust mite),  Eotetranycus  spp.,  Eotetranychus carpini  (yellow spider mite),  Epitimerus  spp.,  Eriophyes  spp.,  Ixodes  spp. (ticks),  Metatetranycus  spp.,  Notoedres cati, Oligonychus  spp.,  Oligonychus coffee, Oligonychus ilicus  (southern red mite),  Panonychus  spp.,  Panonychus citri  (citrus red mite),  Panonychus ulmi  (European red mite),  Phyllocoptruta oleivora  (citrus rust mite),  Polyphagotarsonemun latus  (broad mite),  Rhipicephalus sanguineus  (brown dog tick),  Rhizoglyphus  spp. (bulb mites),  Sarcoptes scabiei  (itch mite),  Tegolophus perseaflorae, Tetranychus  spp.,  Tetranychus urticae  (twospotted spider mite), and  Varroa destructor  (honey bee mite). 
     In additional embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control members of the Order Nematoda (nematodes) including, but not limited to,  Aphelenchoides  spp. (foliar nematodes),  Belonolaimus  spp. (sting nematodes),  Criconemella  spp. (ring nematodes),  Dirofilaria immitis  (dog heartworm),  Ditylenchus  spp. (stem and bulb nematodes),  Heterodera  spp. (cyst nematodes),  Heterodera zeae  (corn cyst nematode),  Hirschmanniella  spp. (root nematodes), Hoplolaimus spp. (lance nematodes),  Meloidogyne  spp. (root knot nematodes),  Meloidogyne incognita  (root knot nematode),  Onchocerca volvulus  (hook-tail worm),  Pratylenchus  spp. (lesion nematodes),  Radopholus  spp. (burrowing nematodes), and  Rotylenchus reniformis  (kidney-shaped nematode). 
     In at least some embodiments, the method of the present disclosure may be used to control at least one insect in one or more of the Orders Lepidoptera, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, Thysanoptera, Isoptera, Orthoptera, Diptera, Hymenoptera, and Siphonaptera, and at least one mite in the Order Acari. 
     In other embodiments, the method of controlling an insect may comprise applying a pesticidal composition near a population of insects, wherein the pesticidal composition comprises a synergistically effective amount of an ecdysone receptor agonist compound in combination with a pesticide selected from N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I), N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)sulfinyl)propanamide (II) or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof, and wherein the insects include  Aphis gossypii  (Glover). 
     In additional embodiments, the method of controlling an insect may comprise applying a pesticidal composition near a population of insects, wherein the pesticidal composition comprises a synergistically effective amount of a diacylhydrazine-based compound in combination with a pesticide selected from N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I), N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)sulfinyl)propanamide (II) or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof, and wherein the insects include  Aphis gossypii  (Glover). 
     In some embodiments, the method of controlling an insect may comprise applying a pesticidal composition near a population of insects, wherein the pesticidal composition comprises a synergistically effective amount of the pesticide in combination with at least one of chromafenozide, halofenozide, methoxyfenozide, tebufenozide, and fufenozide and wherein the insects include  Aphis gossypii  (Glover). 
     In one embodiment of the present disclosure, the pesticidal composition may be used in conjunction (such as, in a compositional mixture, or a simultaneous or sequential application) with one or more compounds having acaricidal, algicidal, avicidal, bactericidal, fungicidal, herbicidal, insecticidal, molluscicidal, nematicidal, rodenticidal, and/or virucidal properties. 
     In another embodiment of the present disclosure, the pesticidal composition may be used in conjunction (such as, in a compositional mixture, or a simultaneous or sequential application) with one or more compounds that are antifeedants, bird repellents, chemosterilants, herbicide safeners, insect attractants, insect repellents, mammal repellents, mating disrupters, plant activators, plant growth regulators, and/or synergists. 
     The pesticidal compositions of the present disclosure show a synergistic effect, providing superior pest control at lower pesticidally effective amounts of the combined active compounds than when an ecdysone receptor agonist compound or a pesticide selected from N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio) propanamide (I), N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl) sulfinyl) propanamide (II), or any agriculturally acceptable salt thereof is used alone. 
     The pesticidal compositions of the present disclosure may have high synergistic pest control and allow for a lower effective dosage rate, an increased environmental safety, and a reduced incidence of pest resistance. 
     The following examples serve to explain embodiments of the present invention in more detail. These examples should not be construed as being exhaustive or exclusive as to the scope of this disclosure. 
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION 
     EXAMPLES 
     Example 1 
     Preparation of 3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanoyl chloride 
     
       
                 
         
             
             
         
      
     
     A dry five-liter round bottom flask equipped with magnetic stirrer, nitrogen inlet, reflux condenser, and thermometer, was charged with 3-(3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanoic acid (prepared as described in the PCT Publication No. WO 2013/062981 to Niyaz et al.) (188 g, 883 mmol) in dichloromethane (CH 2 Cl 2 ) (3 L). Thionyl chloride (525 g, 321 mL, 4.42 mol) was added dropwise over 50 minutes. The reaction mixture was heated to reflux (about 36° C.) for two hours, then cooled to room temperature (about 22° C.). The resulting mixture was concentrated under vacuum on a rotary evaporator, followed by distillation (40 Torr, product collected at a temperature of from about 123° C. to about 127° C.) to provide the title compound as a clear colorless liquid (177.3 g, 86%):  1 H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl 3 ) δ 3.20 (t, J=7.1 Hz, 2H), 2.86 (t, J=7.1 Hz, 2H), 2.78-2.67 (m, 2H), 2.48-2.31 (m, 2H);  19 F NMR (376 MHz, CDCl 3 ) δ −66.42, −66.43, −66.44, −66.44. 
     Example 2 
     Preparation of N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I) 
     
       
                 
         
             
             
         
      
     
     To a solution of 3-chloro-N-ethyl-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-amine (prepared as described in the U.S. Publication No. 2012/0110702 to Yap et al.) (10 g, 44.9 mmol) in CH 2 Cl 2  (100 mL) at a temperature of about 0° C. and under N 2  was added pyridine (5.45 mL, 67.4 mmol), 4-dimethylaminopyridine (DMAP) (2.74 g, 22.45 mmol), and 3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio) propanoyl chloride (9.91 g, 44.9 mmol), sequentially. The reaction was warmed to room temperature and stirred for one hour. The reaction mixture was poured into water (100 mL), and the resulting mixture was stirred for five minutes. The mixture was transferred to a separatory funnel, and the layers were separated. The aqueous phase was extracted with CH 2 Cl 2  (3×50 mL), and the combined organic extracts were dried over sodium sulfate (Na 2 SO 4 ), filtered, and concentrated in vacuo. The crude product was purified via normal phase flash chromatography (0% to 100% EtOAc/CH 2 Cl 2 ) to provide the desired product as a pale yellow solid (17.21 g, 89%): IR (thin film) 1659 cm −1 ;  1 H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl 3 ) δ 8.95 (d, J=2.6 Hz, 1H), 8.63 (dd, J=4.7, 1.3 Hz, 1H), 8.05 (ddd, J=8.3, 2.7, 1.4 Hz, 1H), 7.96 (s, 1H), 7.47 (dd, J=8.3, 4.8 Hz, 1H), 3.72 (q, J=7.1 Hz, 2H), 2.84 (t, J=7.2 Hz, 2H), 2.66 (m, 2H), 237 (t, J=7.2 Hz, 2H), 2.44 (m, 2H), 1.17 (t, J=7.2 Hz, 3H); ESIMS m/z 409 ([M+2H] + ). 
     Example 3 
     Preparation of N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)sulfinyl)propanamide (II) 
     
       
                 
         
             
             
         
      
     
     To a solution of N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I) (500 mg, 1.229 mmol) in hexafluoroisopropanol (5 mL) stirring at room temperature was added 30% hydrogen peroxide (523 mg, 4.92 mmol). The solution was stirred at room temperature for 15 minutes. It was quenched with saturated sodium sulfite solution and extracted with CH 2 Cl 2 . Silica gel chromatography (0%-10% MeOH/CH 2 Cl 2 ) gave the title compound as white semi-solid (495 mg, 95%): IR (thin film) 1660 cm −1 ;  1 H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl 3 ) δ 8.96 (d, J=2.4 Hz, 1H), 8.64 (dd, J=4.7, 1.4 Hz, 1H), 8.07-8.00 (m, 2H), 7.46 (ddd, J=8.3, 4.8, 0.7 Hz, 1H), 3.85-3.61 (m, 2H), 3.23-3.08 (m, 1H), 3.03-2.76 (m, 3H), 2.74-2.52 (m, 4H), 1.18 (t, J=7.2 Hz, 3H); ESIMS m/z 423 ([M+H] + ). 
     Example 4 
     Determination of the Existence of Synergic Effect 
     The method described in Colby S. R., “Calculating Synergistic and Antagonistic Responses of Herbicide Combinations,” Weeds, 1967, 15, 20-22 was used to determine an existence of synergic effect between the ecdysone receptor agonist compound and the pesticide in the formulated pesticidal composition. In this method, the percent insect control of the formulated pesticidal composition as observed in the study was compared to the “expected” percent control (E) as calculated by equation (1) (hereinafter “Colby&#39;s equation”) below: 
                   E   =     X   +   Y   -     (     XY   100     )               (   1   )               
where
 
     X is the percentage of control with the first pesticide at a given rate (p), 
     Y is the percentage of control with the second pesticide at a given rate (q), and 
     E is the expected control by the first and second pesticide at a rate of p+q. 
     If the observed percent control of the formulated pesticidal is greater than E, there is a synergistic effect between the ecdysone receptor agonist compound and the pesticide in the formulated pesticidal composition. If the observed percent control of the formulated pesticidal is equaled to or less than E, there is no synergistic effect between the ecdysone receptor agonist compound and the pesticide in the formulated pesticidal composition. 
     Example 5 
     Synergistic Effect of N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)sulfinyl)propanamide (II) and Methoxyfenozide Against Cotton Aphid,  Aphis gossypii  (Glover) 
     A pesticidal composition was prepared by thoroughly mixing about 0.002 weight % of N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl) sulfinyl)propanamide (hereinafter “compound II”) with about 0.005 weight % of methoxyfenozide. 
     Cotton plants at cotyledon stage were treated with different active compounds using track sprayer. Wingless mixed aphid stages of cotton aphid,  Aphis gossypii  (Glover), were infested onto each plant. The percent control determined three days after the treatment were as shown in TABLE 2. The percent control of the pesticidal composition against cotton aphid,  Aphis gossypii  (Glover), was determined as the “Observed” action, and compared to those obtained by using about 0.002 weight % of compound II, and using about 0.005 weight % of methoxyfenozide alone. The “Colby&#39;s Expected Action” was calculated using Colby&#39;s equation as discussed previously. 
     As shown in TABLE 2, the observed percent control of the pesticidal composition against the cotton aphid (60%) was higher than the expected percentage control according to Colby&#39;s equation (44.6%). This was 34.5% improvement over the Colby&#39;s expected action. Therefore, the pesticidal composition comprising 0.002 weight % of compound II and about 0.005 weight % of methoxyfenozide showed synergistic effect against cotton aphid. 
     
       
         
               
               
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 2 
               
               
                   
               
               
                   
                   
                 % Control 
               
               
                 Treatment for 
                 Dose Rate 
                 Three Days 
               
               
                 Cotton Aphid 
                 (weight %) 
                 After Treatment 
               
               
                   
               
             
             
               
                 Compound II 
                 0.002 
                 28% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide 
                 0.005 
                 23% 
               
               
                 Compound II (+) Methoxyfenozide 
                 0.002 + 0.005 
                 60% 
               
               
                 Observed Action 
               
               
                 Compound II (+) Methoxyfenozide 
                 0.002 + 0.005 
                 44.6%     
               
               
                 Colby’s Expected Action 
               
               
                 Compound II (+) Methoxyfenozide 
                 0.002 + 0.005 
                 15.4%     
               
               
                 Differences: Observed vs. Expected 
               
               
                   
               
             
          
         
       
     
     Example 6 
     Synergistic Effect of N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I) or N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)sulfinyl)propanamide (II) and Methoxyfenozide 
     A pesticidal composition may be prepared by thoroughly mixing compound I (weight %) or compound II (weight %) with methoxyfenozide (weight %). 
     The bioassays may be performed for different active compounds against Cotton Aphid,  Aphis gossypii  (Glover), using the same procedure as that described in EXAMPLE 5. The percent control may be determined some time after the treatment. 
     The observed percent control of the pesticidal composition against Cotton Aphid,  Aphis gossypii  (Glover) is expected to be higher than the expected percentage control according to Colby&#39;s equation. Therefore, the pesticidal composition comprising compound I (weight %) or compound II (weight %) and methoxyfenozide (weight %) is expected to show synergistic effect against Cotton Aphid,  Aphis gossypii  (Glover). 
     Example 7 
     Synergistic Effect of N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I) and Methoxyfenozide Against Diamondback Moth,  Plutella xylostella    
     Three pesticidal compositions with a weight ratio of N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I) (hereinafter “compound I”) to methoxyfenozide of 1:2 were prepared by thoroughly mixing about 0.0025 weight % of compound I with about 0.005 weight % of methoxyfenozide; about 0.000625 weight % of compound I with about 0.00125 weight % of methoxyfenozide; and about 0.0001531 weight % of compound I with about 0.0003125 weight % of methoxyfenozide. 
     Bioassays were performed for different active compounds. Cabbage plants with about two to three new-growth-true leaf stage were treated with individual active compounds and the three separate pesticidal compositions using a track sprayer application at 400 L/Ha spray volume. Three second instar diamondback moths,  Plutella xylostella , were infested onto each leaf disc. The average percent control determined after five days after the treatment were as shown in TABLE 3. The average percent control of the pesticidal composition against diamondback moth,  Plutella xylostella , was determined as the “Average Observed” action, and compared to the average of those obtained by using about 0.0025 weight %, 0.000625 weight %, and 0.0001531 weight % of compound I alone, and using about 0.02 weight %, 0.005 weight %, 0.00125 weight %, and 0.0003125 weight % of methoxyfenozide alone. The “Colby&#39;s Expected Action” was calculated using Colby&#39;s equation as discussed previously. 
     
       
         
               
               
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 3 
               
               
                   
               
               
                   
                 Weight Ratio of 
                 Average % Control 
               
               
                 Treatment for 
                 Compound I to 
                 Five Days 
               
               
                 Diamondback Moth 
                 Methoxyfenozide 
                 After Treatment 
               
               
                   
               
             
             
               
                 Compound I 
                 1:0 
                 7.58% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide 
                 0:1 
                 15.9% 
               
               
                 Compound I (+) 
                 1:2 
                 11.4% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide Average 
               
               
                 Observed Action 
               
               
                 Compound I (+) 
                 1:2 
                 22.3% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide Colby&#39;s 
               
               
                 Expected Action 
               
               
                 Compound I (+) 
                 1:2 
                 −10.9%  
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide Differences: 
               
               
                 Average Observed vs. Expected 
               
               
                   
               
             
          
         
       
     
     Example 8 
     Synergistic Effect of N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I) and Methoxyfenozide Against Diamondback Moth,  Plutella xylostella    
     Two pesticidal compositions with a weight ratio of N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I) (hereinafter “compound I”) to methoxyfenozide of 2:1 were prepared by thoroughly mixing about 0.0025 weight % of compound I with about 0.00125 weight % of methoxyfenozide and about 0.000625 weight % of compound I with about 0.0003125 weight % of methoxyfenozide. 
     Bioassays were performed for different active compounds. Cabbage plants with about two to three new-growth-true leaf stage were treated with individual active compounds and the two separate pesticidal compositions using a track sprayer application at 400 L/Ha spray volume. Three second instar diamondback moths,  Plutella xylostella , were infested onto each leaf disc. The average percent control determined after five days after the treatment were as shown in TABLE 4. The average percent control of the pesticidal composition against diamondback moth,  Plutella xylostella , was determined as the “Average Observed” action, and compared to the average of those obtained by using about 0.0025 weight %, 0.000625 weight %, and 0.0001531 weight % of compound I alone, and using about 0.02 weight %, 0.005 weight %, 0.00125 weight %, and 0.0003125 weight % of methoxyfenozide alone. The “Colby&#39;s Expected Action” was calculated using Colby&#39;s equation as discussed previously. 
     
       
         
               
               
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 4 
               
               
                   
               
               
                   
                 Weight Ratio of 
                 Average % Control 
               
               
                 Treatment for 
                 Compound I to 
                 Five Days 
               
               
                 Diamondback Moth 
                 Methoxyfenozide 
                 After Treatment 
               
               
                   
               
             
             
               
                 Compound I 
                 1:0 
                 7.58% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide 
                 0:1 
                 15.9% 
               
               
                 Compound I (+) 
                 2:1 
                   0% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide Average 
               
               
                 Observed Action 
               
               
                 Compound I (+) 
                 2:1 
                 22.3% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide Colby&#39;s 
               
               
                 Expected Action 
               
               
                 Compound I (+) 
                 2:1 
                 −22.3%  
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide Differences: 
               
               
                 Average Observed vs. Expected 
               
               
                   
               
             
          
         
       
     
     Example 9 
     Synergistic Effect of N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I) and Methoxyfenozide Against Diamondback Moth,  Plutella xylostella    
     A pesticidal compositions with a weight ratio of N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I) (hereinafter “compound I”) to methoxyfenozide of 1:4 was prepared by thoroughly mixing about 0.000625 weight % of compound I with about 0.0025 weight % of methoxyfenozide. 
     Bioassays were performed for different active compounds. Cabbage plants with about two to three new-growth-true leaf stage were treated with individual active compounds and the pesticidal composition using a track sprayer application at 400 L/Ha spray volume. Three second instar diamondback moths,  Plutella xylostella , were infested onto each leaf disc. The average percent control determined after five days after the treatment were as shown in TABLE 5. The average percent control of the pesticidal composition against diamondback moth,  Plutella xylostella , was determined as the “Average Observed” action, and compared to the average of those obtained by using about 0.0025 weight %, 0.000625 weight %, and 0.0001531 weight % of compound I alone, and using about 0.02 weight %, 0.005 weight %, 0.00125 weight %, and 0.0003125 weight % of methoxyfenozide alone. The “Colby&#39;s Expected Action” was calculated using Colby&#39;s equation as discussed previously. 
     As shown in TABLE 5, the average observed percent control of the pesticidal composition against the diamondback moth (68.2%) was higher than the expected percentage control according to Colby&#39;s equation (22.3%). This was 45.9% improvement over the Colby&#39;s expected action. Therefore, the pesticidal composition comprising a weight ratio of 1:4 or 0.000625 weight % of compound I and about 0.0025 weight % of methoxyfenozide showed synergistic effect against diamondback moth. 
     
       
         
               
               
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 5 
               
               
                   
               
               
                   
                 Weight Ratio of 
                 Average % Control 
               
               
                 Treatment for 
                 Compound I to 
                 Five Days 
               
               
                 Diamondback Moth 
                 Methoxyfenozide 
                 After Treatment 
               
               
                   
               
             
             
               
                 Compound I 
                 1:0 
                 7.58% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide 
                 0:1 
                 15.9% 
               
               
                 Compound I (+) 
                 1:4 
                 68.2% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide Average 
               
               
                 Observed Action 
               
               
                 Compound I (+) 
                 1:4 
                 22.3% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide Colby&#39;s 
               
               
                 Expected Action 
               
               
                 Compound I (+) 
                 1:4 
                 45.9% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide Differences: 
               
               
                 Average Observed vs. Expected 
               
               
                   
               
             
          
         
       
     
     Example 10 
     Synergistic Effect of N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I) and Methoxyfenozide Against Diamondback Moth,  Plutella xylostella    
     A pesticidal compositions with a weight ratio of N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I) (hereinafter “compound I”) to methoxyfenozide of 8:1 was prepared by thoroughly mixing about 0.0025 weight % of compound I with about 0.0003125 weight % of methoxyfenozide. 
     Bioassays were performed for different active compounds. Cabbage plants with about two to three new-growth-true leaf stage were treated with individual active compounds and the pesticidal composition using a track sprayer application at 400 L/Ha spray volume. Three second instar diamondback moths,  Plutella xylostella , were infested onto each leaf disc. The average percent control determined after five days after the treatment were as shown in TABLE 6. The average percent control of the pesticidal composition against diamondback moth,  Plutella xylostella , was determined as the “Average Observed” action, and compared to the average of those obtained by using about 0.0025 weight %, 0.000625 weight %, and 0.0001531 weight % of compound I alone, and using about 0.02 weight %, 0.005 weight %, 0.00125 weight %, and 0.0003125 weight % of methoxyfenozide alone. The “Colby&#39;s Expected Action” was calculated using Colby&#39;s equation as discussed previously. 
     
       
         
               
               
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 6 
               
               
                   
               
               
                   
                 Weight Ratio of 
                 Average % Control 
               
               
                 Treatment for 
                 Compound I to 
                 Five Days 
               
               
                 Diamondback Moth 
                 Methoxyfenozide 
                 After Treatment 
               
               
                   
               
             
             
               
                 Compound I 
                 1:0 
                 7.58% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide 
                 0:1 
                 15.9% 
               
               
                 Compound I (+) 
                 8:1 
                 18.2% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide Average 
               
               
                 Observed Action 
               
               
                 Compound I (+) 
                 8:1 
                 22.3% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide Colby&#39;s 
               
               
                 Expected Action 
               
               
                 Compound I (+) 
                 8:1 
                 −4.10%  
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide Differences: 
               
               
                 Average Observed vs. Expected 
               
               
                   
               
             
          
         
       
     
     Example 11 
     Synergistic Effect of N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I) and Methoxyfenozide Against Diamondback Moth,  Plutella xylostella    
     Two pesticidal compositions with a weight ratio of N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I) (hereinafter “compound I”) to methoxyfenozide of 1:32 were prepared by thoroughly mixing about 0.000625 weight % of compound I with about 0.02 weight % of methoxyfenozide and about 0.0001531 weight % of compound I with about 0.005 weight % of methoxyfenozide. 
     Bioassays were performed for different active compounds. Cabbage plants with about two to three new-growth-true leaf stage were treated with individual active compounds and the two separate pesticidal compositions using a track sprayer application at 400 L/Ha spray volume. Three second instar diamondback moths,  Plutella xylostella , were infested onto each leaf disc. The average percent control determined after five days after the treatment were as shown in TABLE 7. The average percent control of the pesticidal composition against diamondback moth,  Plutella xylostella , was determined as the “Average Observed” action, and compared to the average of those obtained by using about 0.0025 weight %, 0.000625 weight %, and 0.0001531 weight % of compound I alone, and using about 0.02 weight %, 0.005 weight %, 0.00125 weight %, and 0.0003125 weight % of methoxyfenozide alone. The “Colby&#39;s Expected Action” was calculated using Colby&#39;s equation as discussed previously. 
     As shown in TABLE 7, the average observed percent control of the pesticidal composition against the diamondback moth (54.6%) was higher than the expected percentage control according to Colby&#39;s equation (22.3%). This was 32.3% improvement over the Colby&#39;s expected action. Therefore, the pesticidal composition comprising a weight ratio of 1:32 showed synergistic effect against diamondback moth. 
     
       
         
               
               
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 7 
               
               
                   
               
               
                   
                 Weight Ratio of 
                 Average % Control 
               
               
                 Treatment for 
                 Compound I to 
                 Five Days 
               
               
                 Diamondback Moth 
                 Methoxyfenozide 
                 After Treatment 
               
               
                   
               
             
             
               
                 Compound I 
                 1:0  
                 7.58% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide 
                 0:1  
                 15.9% 
               
               
                 Compound I (+) 
                 1:32 
                 54.6% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide Average 
               
               
                 Observed Action 
               
               
                 Compound I (+) 
                 1:32 
                 22.3% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide Colby&#39;s 
               
               
                 Expected Action 
               
               
                 Compound I (+) 
                 1:32 
                 32.3% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide Differences: 
               
               
                 Average Observed vs. Expected 
               
               
                   
               
             
          
         
       
     
     Example 12 
     Synergistic Effect of N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I) and Methoxyfenozide Against Diamondback Moth,  Plutella xylostella    
     Two pesticidal compositions with a weight ratio of N-(3-chloro-1-(pyridin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-N-ethyl-3-((3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)thio)propanamide (I) (hereinafter “compound I”) to methoxyfenozide of 1:8 were prepared by thoroughly mixing about 0.000625 weight % of compound I with about 0.005 weight % of methoxyfenozide and about 0.0001531 weight % of compound I with about 0.00125 weight % of methoxyfenozide. 
     Bioassays were performed for different active compounds. Cabbage plants with about two to three new-growth-true leaf stage were treated with individual active compounds and the two separate pesticidal compositions using a track sprayer application at 400 L/Ha spray volume. Three second instar diamondback moths,  Plutella xylostella , were infested onto each leaf disc. The average percent control determined after five days after the treatment were as shown in TABLE 8. The average percent control of the pesticidal composition against diamondback moth,  Plutella xylostella , was determined as the “Average Observed” action, and compared to the average of those obtained by using about 0.0025 weight %, 0.000625 weight %, and 0.0001531 weight % of compound I alone, and using about 0.02 weight %, 0.005 weight %, 0.00125 weight %, and 0.0003125 weight % of methoxyfenozide alone. The “Colby&#39;s Expected Action” was calculated using Colby&#39;s equation as discussed previously. 
     
       
         
               
               
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 8 
               
               
                   
               
               
                   
                 Weight Ratio of 
                 Average % Control 
               
               
                 Treatment for 
                 Compound I to 
                 Five Days 
               
               
                 Diamondback Moth 
                 Methoxyfenozide 
                 After Treatment 
               
               
                   
               
             
             
               
                 Compound I 
                 1:0 
                 7.58% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide 
                 0:1 
                 15.9% 
               
               
                 Compound I (+) 
                 1:8 
                 14.8% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide Average 
               
               
                 Observed Action 
               
               
                 Compound I (+) 
                 1:8 
                 22.3% 
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide Colby&#39;s 
               
               
                 Expected Action 
               
               
                 Compound I (+) 
                 1:8 
                 −7.51%  
               
               
                 Methoxyfenozide Differences: 
               
               
                 Average Observed vs. Expected 
               
               
                   
               
             
          
         
       
     
     While the present disclosure may be susceptible to various modifications and alternative forms, specific embodiments have been described by way of example in detail herein. However, it should be understood that the present disclosure is not intended to be limited to the particular forms disclosed. Rather, the present disclosure is to cover all modifications, equivalents, and alternatives falling within the scope of the present disclosure as defined by the following appended claims and their legal equivalents.