BR112020020436B1 - METHOD FOR PREVENTING OR TREATING A DISEASE IN PLANTS, AND, USE OF THE COMPOSITION - Google Patents

Abstract

The preparation, composition, and method of use of an antibacterial formulation utilizing tannins, acceptable for agriculture and for use against bacterial diseases and fungicides in plants. The composition is based on an organic matrix and can be balanced with dispersants, flocculants and humectants, and can be used against a wide range of agricultural bacterial diseases.

Description

[1] This application claims the benefit of U.S. provisional application 62/722,782, filed August 24, 2018, U.S. provisional application 62/723,168, filed August 27, 2018, and U.S. provisional application 62/727,237, filed at September 5, 2018, the entire contents of each are hereby incorporated by reference in their entireties.

FUNDAMENTALS

[2] Bacteria are the most abundant microorganisms on our planet, and the prevention and control of bacteria and the diseases they cause, particularly in the agricultural field, are of extreme importance, as they directly impact the necessary food production for human sustenance. Some examples of these are mentioned below.

[3] Erwinia amylovora has caused incalculable losses by destroying entire apple and pear plantations in countries where fruit trees are grown. For example, in the state of Chihuahua, in Mexico alone, more than 50 thousand pear trees died and more than a million trees of different apple varieties were infected. This caused as much as the abandonment of the cultivation of such fruits in producing regions of this state. Thus, this evolved from a phytosanitary problem for fruit producers to a serious social problem. Fruit growers are seriously concerned about the symptoms of the disease, in which infected trees look as if they have been burned with a flamethrower, hence the name “fire blight”. This same situation occurred in highly industrialized countries where these fruits are grown, such as, for example, the United States of America, England, France, and the countries of the former Soviet Union. After the flowering season, bacteria splashed by moisture events such as drizzle, dew and wind can infect succulent buds. Dry pointer or pointer drought appears in one to several weeks after petal fall. Disease symptoms continue to progress through the spring and summer season in susceptible tissues such as leaves and branches.

[4] Pierce's disease, caused by the bacteria Xylella fastidiosa, has strategic importance due to the amount of money that is spent when it attacks crops such as vines, olives, citrus plants, stone fruit trees such as plums and peaches, as well as like almond trees. This has a devastating effect due to the large surfaces it affects. It is also one of the bacteria most studied by scientists due to the bacteria's habit of colonization, in which they can survive in different varietal cuts that were transported without strict sanitary control at the borders. The disease has spread, and has already been reported in a good number of countries in Latin America, Europe and Asia. This disease is considered a main limiting factor in the expansion and success of affected cultivars.

[5] In Central and South America, thousands of African palm trees are dying due to a disease caused by a bacteria that has not been correctly identified. This has created a need for alternatives to control it and for a product that can counteract the devastating effects of the plague. In doing so, it is necessary to establish research protocols with appropriate scientific rigor and for the protocols to be carried out with a large team of producers, and potentially governments, in order to establish the biological cycle of the pathogen and how to treat or prevent it. .

[6] In banana producing countries threatened by a terrible disease called “moko”, caused by a bacteria called Ralstonia solanacearum, there has been the loss and abandonment of entire crops, which are impossible to replant due to the pathogen surviving in the soil for years in the tissues of a diseased plant. Farmers have to spend large sums of money to sterilize the soil by applying toxic materials, which cause negative effects on the beneficial flora and fauna in the area, thus altering the balance and delicate nutritional biogeochemical cycles present in this ecosystem.

[7] Of equal importance are the bacteria that attack vegetables, grasses, members of the cruciferous family, members of the solanaceous family, members of the rosacea family, members of the ericaceous family, and the like when in favorable climatic conditions for the development of the disease can occur. almost completely lose their crops and to avoid them, farmers will have to invest large sums of money in the application of antibiotic-based materials depending on their legislation and availability.

[8] The use of antibiotics in agriculture, such as gentamicin, oxytetracycline, streptomycin, and kasugamycin, offers viable alternatives for the prevention and control of these exemplary pathogens, but the use of these antibiotics has been limited during recent years in Europe, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and Brazil. As a result, producers have very limited options for treating or preventing bacterial diseases that, year after year, reduce their crops and cause major crop losses. Growers can only use copper-based formulations for foliar applications, which offer limited control of the health emergency they have. In these countries, where the use of antibiotics is prohibited for agricultural use, the incidence of bacterial diseases is increasing in a worrying manner and, in some places, such as Italy, Spain, New Zealand, France and other countries, the production of both wine how much kiwi is going through a delicate stage due to the presence of diseases caused by bacteria that have devastated entire cultivars. In Australia, there is serious concern by governments and producers about a bacterial disease that has been present in wheat, blueberries, sugar cane and cereals, thereby putting the production of these foods in check. The same happens in Brazil, the United States and England, where citrus plant producers are reporting incalculable losses resulting from a disease called the “Yellow Dragon”, which is caused by the bacterium Candidatus liberibacter also affecting China, Taiwan, India , Malaysia, Indonesia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Pakistan, Thailand, Nepal, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and others.

SUMMARY

[9] The main purpose of this description is to provide a new antibacterial formulation acceptable for agricultural use. The formulation is effective for preventing, treating and controlling diseases caused by bacteria and fungi in plants, whilst also providing for an environmentally friendly composition, thereby allowing its authorized use in countries that have high registration standards and in countries in which the use of antibiotics was controlled or prohibited.

[10] The formulation comprises tannins as an active ingredient mixed with agriculturally acceptable excipients, for example, a lignin such as sodium lignosulfonate, a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon such as naphthalene sulfonate, polysaccharides such as starch, and siliceous sedimentary rock such as earth diatom. The agriculturally acceptable formulation can be deposited and mixed with a reasonable amount of water to be sprayed in very fine droplets of water “to the dripping point” through equipment appropriate to the crop to be protected, in which bacterial damage may be present. present and would otherwise continue to harm plants. The agriculturally acceptable formulation thereby avoids exceeding profitable economic limits for the food producer.

[11] The present description relates, in part, to a composition comprising tannins, to a method for using the composition comprising tannins, and to the use of the composition comprising tannins. The following description provides additional detail regarding the composition's contents and how it can be used and applied to plants.

[12] Tannins have been used since ancient times in the tanning industry. The Egyptians used acacia fruits for tanning purposes, and tannins are also used in wine making and medicine to naturally treat some diseases in humans. Tannins are polyphenolic compounds that are very astringent and have a bitter taste.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[13] Figures 1(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of a tannin premix was tested against Clavibacter sp.

[14] Figures 2(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of a tannin premix was tested against Clavibacter sp.

[15] Figures 3(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of a tannin premix was tested against Clavibacter sp.

[16] Figures 4(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of a tannin premix was tested against Clavibacter sp.

[17] Figures 5(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of a tannin premix was tested against Clavibacter sp.

[18] Figures 6(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of a tannin premix was tested against Clavibacter sp.

[19] Figures 7(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of a tannin premix was tested against Clavibacter sp.

[20] Figures 8(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of a tannin premix was tested against Clavibacter sp.

[21] Figures 9(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of a tannin premix was tested against Clavibacter sp.

[22] Figures 10(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of a tannin premix was tested against Erwinia sp.

[23] Figures 11(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of a tannin premix was tested against Erwinia sp.

[24] Figures 12(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of a tannin premix was tested against Erwinia sp.

[25] Figures 13(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of a tannin premix was tested against Erwinia sp.

[26] Figures 14(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of a tannin premix was tested against Erwinia sp.

[27] Figures 15(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of a tannin premix was tested against Erwinia sp.

[28] Figures 16(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of a tannin premix was tested against Pseudomonas sp.

[29] Figures 17(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of a tannin premix was tested against Pseudomonas sp.

[30] Figures 18(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of a tannin premix was tested against Pseudomonas sp.

[31] Figures 19(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of a tannin premix was tested against Pseudomonas sp.

[32] Figures 20(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of a tannin premix was tested against Pseudomonas sp.

[33] Figures 21(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of a tannin premix was tested against Pseudomonas sp.

[34] Figures 22(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of a tannin premix was tested against Ralstonia sp.

[35] Figures 23(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of a tannin premix was tested against Ralstonia sp.

[36] Figures 24(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of a tannin premix was tested against Ralstonia sp.

[37] Figures 25(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of a tannin premix was tested against Ralstonia sp.

[38] Figures 26(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of a tannin premix was tested against Ralstonia sp.

[39] Figures 27(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of a tannin premix was tested against Ralstonia sp.

[40] Figures 28(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of a tannin premix was tested against Ralstonia sp.

[41] Figures 29(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of a tannin premix was tested against Ralstonia sp.

[42] Figures 30(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of a tannin premix was tested against Ralstonia sp.

[43] Figures 3l(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of a tannin premix was tested against Xanthomonas sp.

[44] Figures 32(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of a tannin premix was tested against Xanthomonas sp.

[45] Figures 33(a) to (c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of a tannin premix was tested against Xanthomonas sp.

[46] Figure 34 shows the results of a test using composition A5.

[47] Figure 35 shows the results of a test using the Bl 5 composition.

[48] Figure 36 shows the results of a test using the +20 composition.

[49] Figure 37 shows the results of a test using composition A.

[50] Figure 38 shows the results of a test using composition A5.

[51] Figure 39 shows the results of a test using composition B 15.

[52] Figure composition +20. 40 shows the results of a test using the

[53] Figure composition A. 41 shows the results of a test using the

[54] Figure composition A5. 42 shows the results of a test using the

[55] Figure composition B15. 43 shows the results of a test using the

[56] Figures 44(a) and (b) show the results of a test using the +20 composition.

[57] Figures 45(a) and (b) show the results of a test using composition A.

[58] Figure 46 shows the results of a test using composition A5.

[59] Figure 47 shows the results of a test using composition B15.

[60] Figures 48(a) to (c) show the results of a test using the +20 composition.

[61] Figure 49 shows the test results using composition A.

[62] Figures 50(a) and (b) show examples of flower burning that was measured during a test.

[63] Figure 51 is a graphical representation of tabular data.

[64] Figure 52 is a graphical representation of tabular data.

[65] Figure 53 is a graphical representation of tabular data.

[66] Figures 54(a) and (b) are linear prediction maps (Kriging).

[67] Figures 55(a) and (b) show the results of a test against Alternaria sp.

[68] Figures 56(a) and (b) show the results of a test against Phytophthora sp.

[69] Figures 57(a) and (b) show the results of a test against Colletotrichum sp.

[70] Figures 58(a) and (b) show the results of a test against Fusarium sp.

[71] Figures 59(a) and (b) show the results of a test against Fusarium sp.

[72] Figures 60(a) and (b) show the results of a test against Fusarium sp.

[73] Figures 61(a) and (b) show the results of a test against Aspergillus sp.

[74] Figures 62(a) and (b) show the results of a test against Aspergillus sp.

[75] Figures 63(a) and (b) show the results of a test against Aspergillus sp.

[76] Figure 64 shows the results of a test against Clavibacter sp.

[77] Clavibacter sp. Figure 65 shows the results of a test against

[78] Clavibacter sp. Figure 66 shows the results of a test against

[79] Clavibacter sp. Figure 67 shows the results of a test against

[80] Figure 68 shows the results of a test against Erwinia sp.

[81] Figure 69 shows the results of a test against Erwinia sp.

[82] Figure 70 shows the results of a test against Erwinia sp.

[83] Figure 71 shows the results of a test against Erwinia sp.

[84] Figure 72 shows the results of a test against Ralstonia sp.

[85] Figure 73 shows the results of a test against Ralstonia sp.

[86] Figure 74 shows the results of a test against Ralstonia sp.

[87] Figure 75 shows the results of a test against Ralstonia sp.

[88] Figure 76 shows the results of a test against Xanthomonas sp.

[89] Figure 77 shows the results of a test against Xanthomonas sp.

[90] Figure 78 shows the results of a test against Xanthomonas sp.

[91] Figure 79 shows the results of a test against Xanthomonas sp.

[92] Figure 80 shows the results of a test against Xanthomonas sp.

[93] Figure 81 shows the results of a test against Xanthomonas sp.

[94] Figure 82 shows the results of a test against Xanthomonas sp.

[95] Figure 83 shows the results of a test against Xanthomonas sp.

[96] Figure 84 shows the results of a test against Erwinia sp.

[97] Figure 85 shows the results of a test against Erwinia sp.

[98] Figure 86 shows the results of a test against Erwinia sp.

[99] Figure 87 shows the results of a test against Erwinia sp.

[100] Figure 88 shows the results of a test against Ralstonia sp.

[101] Figure 89 shows the results of a test against Ralstonia sp.

[102] Figure 90 shows the results of a test against Ralstonia sp.

[103] Figure 91 shows the results of a test against Ralstonia sp.

[104] Figure 92 shows the results of a test against Clavibacter sp.

[105] Figure 93 shows the results of a test against Clavibacter sp.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[106] The agriculturally acceptable formulation of the present description may include tannins as an active ingredient mixed with agriculturally acceptable excipients. Such agriculturally acceptable excipients include, for example, bactericides, resistance inducers, biopesticides, fungicides, foliar fertilizers, hormones, and the like.

[107] Tannins that can be used in the agriculturally acceptable formulation include any type of tannin, such as but not limited to ellagic, pyrogallols, or gallic tannins. Also “pseudotannins” can be used such as gallic acid, such as atrihydroxybenzoic acid, or ellagic acid. Castalagin and vescalagin (both are ellagic tannins) are examples of such tannins, but tannins are not limited to them, and other tannins can also be used. For example, flavan-3-ols such as catechin, epicatechin gallate, epigallocatechin, epigallocatechin gallate, proanthrocyanidins, theaflavins, and thearubigins can be used. Chlorogenic acids (CGA), such as hydroxycinnamic acids, caffeic acid, ferulic acid, and p-coumaric acid and quinic acid, can also be used. In addition, ipecac acids such as methine, cephaelin, emethamine, ipecac acid, psychotrin, and O-methylpsychotrin can also be used. Tannins such as roburin, castalin, castanopsinines, casuaricin, excoecarianin, excoecarinins, grandinin, pterocarinin, punicacortein, punicalagin, roipteleanins, roburins, vescalin, gallic acid, ellagic acid, procyanidin, can also be used. Importantly, the above tannins are exemplary only, and any other tannin may be used. Tannins can be used alone or in combination with each other. Natural or synthetic tannins can be used. In exemplary embodiments, the tannin may be one or more of a flavanoid, procyanidin, proanthrocyanin, prodelphinidin, profisetidin, proanthrocyanidin, cyanidin, anthrocyanin, and catechin. The formulations of the present description may also comprise, in some cases, flavanones and/or flavanols, for example.

[108] The amount of tannins that may be present in the agriculturally acceptable formulation is not particularly limited, but may be an amount of 0.01% by mass to 99% by mass. For example, they may be present in the formulation in an amount of 0.1% by mass to 50% by mass. As another example, they may be present in the formulation in an amount of 0.1% by mass to 10% by mass. As another example, they may be present in the formulation in an amount of 0.1 mass % to 1 mass %, 0.5 mass % to 5 mass %, 1 mass % to 10 mass % , from 10% to 20% by mass, from 20% to 30% by mass, from 30% to 40% by mass, from 40% to 50% by mass, from 50% to 60% by mass, from 60% to 70% by mass, 70% to 80% by mass, and 80% to 90% by mass. As another example, they may be present in the formulation in an amount of 1 mass % to 25 mass %, 10 mass % to 50 mass %, 25 mass % to 75 mass %, or 50 % by mass to 99% by mass. However, the amount of tannin is not particularly limited as long as the amount provides the antibacterial or antifungal effects described here. Tannins can be used and applied to plants in amounts greater or less than any amount that may otherwise be present in a plant that has not been treated with the currently described composition. If tannins are applied to a plant that produces tannins, the tannins applied to a given plant may be different from any tannin produced by that plant, or alternatively it may be the same type of tannin produced by that plant.

[109] The tannin-based preparation may include one or more other agriculturally acceptable items, such as dispersants, surfactants and/or humectants, inert components, thickeners, bactericides, resistance inducers, biopesticides, fungicides, foliage fertilizers, hormones and similar.

[110] Examples of the dispersants that can be used with the agriculturally acceptable formulation include, but are not limited to, sodium lignosulfonate, alpha-olefin sulfonates, alkyl lauryl sulfonates, lignin sulfonates, block copolymers, ethylene oxide/ propylene oxide, polyoxyethylene-polyoxypropylene copolymers, tridecyl alcohol ethoxylalates, and polyacrylates. Dispersant mixtures can also be used. The amount of dispersant present is not particularly limited. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a dispersant in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of dispersants in the formulation, may be between 1% and 70%. In still further exemplary embodiments, the amount of a dispersant in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of dispersants in the formulation, may be greater than, for example, 2%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25 %, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60% or 65%. In other exemplary embodiments, the amount of a dispersant in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of dispersants in the formulation, may be less than, for example, 2%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25% , 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60% or 65%. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a dispersant in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of dispersants in the formulation, may be between 5% and 20%, 15% and 30%, 25% and 40%, 40% and 55%. % or 55% and 70%.

[111] Examples of surfactants and/or humectants that can be used with the agriculturally acceptable formulation include, but are not limited to, naphthalene sulfonate, sodium dioctyl sulfosuccinate, glycerin, polyglycerin, castor oil and/or soybean oil, dodecylbenzene sodium sulfonate, sodium lauryl sulfate, and other phosphates. Mixtures of surfactants and/or humectants can also be used. The amount of surfactants and/or humectants present is not particularly limited. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a surfactant and/or humectant in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of surfactants and/or humectants in the formulation, may be between 1% and 70%. In still further exemplary embodiments, the amount of a surfactant and/or humectant in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of surfactants and/or humectants in the formulation, may be greater than, for example, 2%, 5%, 10% , 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60% or 65%. In other exemplary embodiments, the amount of a surfactant and/or humectant in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of surfactants and/or humectants in the formulation, may be less than, for example, 2%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60% or 65%. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a surfactant and/or humectant in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of surfactants and/or humectants in the formulation, may be between 5% and 20%, 15% and 30%, 25% and 40%, 40% and 55% or 55% and 70%.

[112] Examples of the inert components that can be used with the agriculturally acceptable formulation include, but are not limited to, celite, diatomaceous earth, bentonite, pyrophyllite, kaolin, montmorillonite, thenardite, attapulgite, dolomite, clay, cork, humic acids, and fulvic acids. Mixtures of inert components can also be used. The amount of inert components present is not particularly limited. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of an inert component in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of inert components in the formulation, may be between 1% and 95%. In still further exemplary embodiments, the amount of an inert component in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of inert components in the formulation, may be greater than, for example, 2%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20% , 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60%, 65%, 70%, 75%, 80%, 85% or 90%. In other exemplary embodiments, the amount of an inert component in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of inert components in the formulation, may be less than, for example, 2%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60%, 65%, 70%, 75%, 80%, 85% or 90%. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of an inert component in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of inert components in the formulation, may be between 5% and 20%, 15% and 30%, 25% and 40%, 40% and 55%, 55% and 70%, 70% and 85% or 80% and 95%.

[113] Examples of thickeners that can be used with the agriculturally acceptable formulation include, but are not limited to, xanthan gum, guar gum, maltodextrins, dextrins, lecithin and polysaccharides. Thickener mixtures can also be used. The amount of thickeners present is not particularly limited. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a thickener in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of thickeners in the formulation, may be between 1% and 70%. In still further exemplary embodiments, the amount of a thickener in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of thickeners in the formulation, may be greater than, for example, 2%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%. %, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60% or 65%. In other exemplary embodiments, the amount of a thickener in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of thickeners in the formulation, may be less than, for example, 2%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25% , 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60% or 65%. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a thickener in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of thickeners in the formulation, may be between 5% and 20%, 15% and 30%, 25% and 40%, 40% and 55%. % or 55% and 70%.

[114] Examples of the bactericides that can be used with the agriculturally acceptable formulation include, but are not limited to, gentamicin, streptomycin, oxytetracycline, kasugamycin, kanamycin, TCMTB ((benzothiazol-2-ylthio)methyl thiocyanate), MTC (bis( methylene thiocyanate), blasticidin, natamycin, and mixtures thereof. Additional examples of bactericides that can be used include other aminoglycosides and other tetracyclines. The amount of bactericides present is not particularly limited. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a bactericide in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of bactericides in the formulation, may be between 5% and 60%. In still further exemplary embodiments, the amount of a bactericide in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of bactericides in the formulation, may be greater than, for example, 7%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30 %, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50% or 55%. In other exemplary embodiments, the amount of a thickener in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of thickeners in the formulation, may be less than, for example, 7%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30% , 35%, 40%, 45%, 50% or 55%. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a thickener in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of thickeners in the formulation, may be between 5% and 20%, 15% and 30%, 25% and 40%, 40% and 55%. % or 50% and 60%.

[115] Examples of resistance inducers that can be used with the agriculturally acceptable formulation include, but are not limited to fluoxastrobin, metominostrobin, himexazole, acibenzolar-s-methyl, mandestrobin, coumoxystrobin, fluphenoxystrobin, mandestrobin, azoxystrobin, enoxastrobin, picoxystrobin, pyroxystrobin, pyraclostrobin, pyramethostrobin, triclopiricarb, famoxadone, dimoxystrobin, phenaminstrobin, orisastrobin, kresoxim-methyl, trifloxystrobin, laminarin, and mixtures thereof. The amount of resistance inductors present is not particularly limited. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a resistance inducer in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of resistance inducers in the formulation, may be between 5% and 50%. In still further exemplary embodiments, the amount of a resistance inducer in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of resistance inducers in the formulation, may be greater than, for example, 7%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40% or 45%. In other exemplary embodiments, the amount of a resistance inducer in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of resistance inducers in the formulation, may be less than, for example, 7%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25 %, 30%, 35%, 40% or 45%. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a resistance inducer in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of resistance inducers in the formulation, may be between 5% and 15%, 15% and 25%, 25% and 35%, 35% and 45% or 40% and 50%.

[116] Examples of biopesticides that can be used with the agriculturally acceptable formulation include, but are not limited to, Bacillus subtillis, Bacillus amyloliquefasciens, carboxylic acids, oxolinic acids, Bacillus mycoides, Trichoderma atriviride, chitosan, and mixtures thereof. The amount of biopesticides present is not particularly limited. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a biopesticide in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of biopesticides in the formulation, may be between 10% and 50%. In still further exemplary embodiments, the amount of a biopesticide in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of biopesticides in the formulation, may be greater than, for example, 12%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35 %, 40% or 45%. In other exemplary embodiments, the amount of a biopesticide in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of biopesticides in the formulation, may be less than, for example, 12%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30% , 35%, 40% or 45%. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a biopesticide in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of biopesticides in the formulation, may be between 10% and 15%, 15% and 25%, 25% and 35%, 35% and 45%. % or 40% and 50%.

[117] Examples of fungicides that can be used with the agriculturally acceptable formulation include, but are not limited to, chlorothalonil, PCNB (pentachloronitrobenzene), maneb, coppers, ziram, mancozeb, metalaxyl, benomyl, iprodione, thifluzamide, dimethomorph, myclobutanil, penthiopyrad , fludioxonil, cyazofamide, thiabendazole, propamocarb, fenexamide, boscalid, fluopicolide, Reynoutria sachalinensis extract, triflumizole, iprodione, propamocarb, prochloraz, thiabendazole, epoxiconazole, metalaxyl, cymoxanil, picarbutrazox, and mixtures thereof. The amount of fungicides present is not particularly limited. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a fungicide in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of fungicides in the formulation, may be between 5% and 75%. In still further exemplary embodiments, the amount of a fungicide in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of fungicides in the formulation, may be greater than, for example, 7%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30 %, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60%, 65% or 70%. In other exemplary embodiments, the amount of a fungicide in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of fungicides in the formulation, may be less than, for example, 7%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30% , 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60%, 65% or 70%. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a fungicide in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of fungicides in the formulation, may be between 5% and 20%, 15% and 30%, 25% and 40%, 40% and 55%. %, 55% and 70% or 60% and 75%.

[118] Examples of foliage fertilizers that can be used with the agriculturally acceptable formulation include, but are not limited to, magnesium, boron, zinc, nitrogen, manganese, calcium, aluminum, chelates, iron, molybdenum, potassium, cobalt, copper, phosphite, sulfur and amino acids. The amount of foliage fertilizer present is not particularly limited. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a foliage fertilizer in the formulation, or the total amount of a foliage fertilizer mixture in the formulation, may be between 0.0001% and 60%. In still further exemplary embodiments, the amount of a foliage fertilizer in the formulation, or the total amount of a foliage fertilizer mixture in the formulation, may be greater than, for example, 0.0005%, 0.001%, 0.005%, 0. 01%, 0.05%, 0.1%, 0.5%, 1%, 5%, 15%, 25%, 35%, 45% or 55%. In still further exemplary embodiments, the amount of a foliage fertilizer in the formulation, or the total amount of a foliage fertilizer mixture in the formulation, may be less than, for example, 0.0005%, 0.001%, 0.005%, 0. 01%, 0.05%, 0.1%, 0.5%, 1%, 5%, 15%, 25%, 35%, 45% or 55%. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a foliage fertilizer in the formulation, or the total amount of a foliage fertilizer mixture in the formulation, may be between 0.0001% and 0.001%, 0.01% and 0.1%, 0. .1% and 1%, 1% and 10%, 5% and 25%, 15% and 30%, 25% and 50% or 40% and 60%.

[119] Examples of hormones that can be used with the agriculturally acceptable formulation include, but are not limited to, cytokines, gibrelins and auxins. The amount of hormones present is not particularly limited. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a hormone in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of hormones in the formulation, may be between 0.0001% and 20%. In still further exemplary embodiments, the amount of a hormone in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of hormones in the formulation, may be greater than, for example, 0.0005%, 0.001%, 0.005%, 0.01%, 0.05%, 0.1%, 0.5%, 1%, 2.5%, 5%, 7.5%, 10%, 12.5%, 15% or 17.5%. In still further exemplary embodiments, the amount of a hormone in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of hormones in the formulation, may be less than, for example, 0.0005%, 0.001%, 0.005%, 0.01%, 0.05%, 0.1%, 0.5%, 1%, 2.5%, 5%, 7.5%, 10%, 12.5%, 15% or 17.5%. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a hormone in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of hormones in the formulation, may be between 0.0001% and 0.001%, 0.01% and 0.1%, 0.1% and 1%, 1% and 5%, 5% and 10%, 10% and 15% or 15% and 20%.

[120] Examples of other agriculturally acceptable materials that can be used with the agriculturally acceptable formulation include, but are not limited to, copper sulfate, copper oxychloride, copper hydroxide, cuprocalcium sulfate, sulfur in all variants, copper gluconate, copper octanoate, tribasic copper sulfate, calcium chloride, phosphoric acid, zinc oxide, phosphite, and mixtures thereof. The amount of other agriculturally acceptable materials present is not particularly limited. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of another agriculturally acceptable material in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of other agriculturally acceptable materials in the formulation, may be between 0.05% and 70%. In still further exemplary embodiments, the amount of another agriculturally acceptable material in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of other agriculturally acceptable materials in the formulation, may be greater than, for example, 0.1%, 0.5%, 1%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60% or 65%. In other exemplary embodiments, the amount of another agriculturally acceptable material in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of other agriculturally acceptable materials in the formulation, may be less than, for example, 0.1%, 0.5%, 1 %, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60% or 65%. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of another agriculturally acceptable material in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of other agriculturally acceptable materials in the formulation, may be between 0.05% and 0.1%, 0.1% and 0. .5%, 0.5% and 1%, 1% and 5%, 5% and 15%, 15% and 25%, 25% and 40%, 40% and 50%, 50% and 60% or 60% and 70%.

[121] To form the agriculturally acceptable formulation, a premix of tannins can be used to which the other materials present in the agriculturally acceptable formulation can be added. An example of a tannin premix includes a blend that contains about 65% tannins (the blend of about 35.5% castalagin, about 23.3% vascalagin, about 2.0% castalin , and about 5.0% vescaline), about 15% sugars, and about 15% bentonite, with the remainder being water (unless otherwise noted, this premix will be referred to as Premix mixture A). The premix contents are not particularly limited, but an exemplary premix may comprise tannins, carbohydrates and bentonite.

[122] An exemplary formulation includes a mixture of 5% by mass of premix A and 95% by mass of diatomaceous earth (e.g., 50 grams of tannins per kilogram of the formulation and 950 grams of diatomaceous earth per kilogram of the formulation). .

[123] Another exemplary formulation includes a mixture of 10% by mass of premix A and 90% by mass of diatomaceous earth (e.g., 100 grams of tannins per kilogram of the formulation and 900 grams of diatomaceous earth per kilogram of the formulation ).

[124] Another exemplary formulation includes a mixture of 20% by mass of premix A and 80% by mass of diatomaceous earth (e.g., 200 grams of tannins per kilogram of the formulation and 800 grams of diatomaceous earth per kilogram of the formulation ).

[125] Another exemplary formulation includes a mixture of Premix A (200 grams, 20% by mass), sodium lignosulfonate (40 grams, 4% by mass), naphthalene sulfonate (20 grams, 2% by mass) , xanthan gum (5 grams, 0.50% by mass), and diatomaceous earth (735 grams, 73.50% by mass).

[126] The agriculturally acceptable formulation of the present description can be, for example, deposited in and mixed with a reasonable amount of water to be sprayed in very fine droplets of water “to the dripping point” by means of equipment appropriate to the crop. which is intended to protect, where pathogen damage may be present and would otherwise continue to harm plants. The amount of water that can be mixed with the agriculturally acceptable formulation can be, for example, 50 liters of water per 2 kilograms per hectare when applied by plane; 1,000 liters of water per 2 kilograms per hectare when applied to plants using a sprayer; 400 to 600 liters of water per 2 kilograms per hectare when used on plants such as tomatoes, peppers, onions, and the like. The amount of water used is not particularly limited, however, and any dilution can be used as long as it provides the antipathogenic effects described here.

[127] The method by which the agriculturally acceptable formulation can be administered to plants is not particularly restricted. Examples include application of the agriculturally acceptable formulation by airplane or sprayer (such as an air blown sprayer, a hand sprayer, or a mechanical sprayer). The agriculturally acceptable formulation may also be applied by a rainstorm, in which the agriculturally acceptable formulation is administered to the soil. Furthermore, the agriculturally acceptable formulation can be applied to plants through irrigation systems. In certain cases, the agriculturally acceptable formulation may also be injected into a plant.

[128] The agriculturally acceptable formulation can be applied to a plant, a foliage of the plant, or can be applied to the soil. For example, the agriculturally acceptable formulation can be applied to the foliage, stem, crown, trunk, roots, shoots, branches and/or flowers of a plant. The agriculturally acceptable formulation can also be applied to the seeds and rhizomes of the plant. The agriculturally acceptable formulation can be applied to seedlings.

[129] If applied to a plant or plant foliage, the agriculturally acceptable formulation can be administered in an amount so as to provide the bactericidal effect of the present description. For example, the agriculturally acceptable formulation can be applied in a manner that administers the amount of tannin necessary to provide the antipathogenic effects of the present invention. Such amounts can be determined based on the concentration of tannins present in the agriculturally acceptable formulation. For example, an amount of 2 kilograms (diluted in an appropriate amount of water) per hectare of plants may be appropriate. The agriculturally acceptable formulation can be administered to plants at intervals, for example, from 1 to 21 days, preferably at intervals of 2 to 14 days, and also preferably at intervals of 3 to 7 days. However, quantities and ranges are not limited to this and can be determined agriculturally acceptable. The agriculturally acceptable formulation can be administered at the nursery stage, at the seedling stage, at the transplant stage, at the vegetative stage, pre-flowering, during full flowering, post-flowering, and during fruiting. The agriculturally acceptable formulation can also be administered during plant dormancy.

[130] The agriculturally acceptable formulation of the present description can be produced by mixing the materials listed above together. The way in which the materials are mixed is not particularly limiting. The agriculturally acceptable formulation can then be added to a predetermined amount of water and, if necessary, water conditioner.

[131] The agriculturally acceptable formulation is a bactericidal and fungicidal formulation that can be used on a wide variety of plants and plant species that have great economic importance. These include, but are not limited to, vegetable crops such as artichokes, asparagus, beets, beetroot, peppers, broccoli, Brussels sprouts, cabbage, carrots, cauliflower, celery, corn, cucumber, eggplant, beans, green beans, onions, green onions, leeks, lettuce, peas, peppers, potatoes, pumpkins, radishes, chives, pumpkin, sweet potatoes, tomatoes, zucchini, and mushrooms; as well as cereal crops such as wheat, oats, corn, rice, barley, sorghum, triticale, quinoa, and the like; as well as fruit crops such as avocado, apple, pears, peaches, plum, banana, prunes, citrus plant, lemons, oranges, pomegranate, papaya, mango, lychee, rambutan, strawberry, cranberry, blackberry, raspberry; as well as other crops such as nuts, pastures, sugar cane, and similar crops.

[132] The agriculturally acceptable formulation has also shown benefits in the treatment of nurseries and seedbeds, as well as in ornamental plants, such as flowers including chrysanthemums, daisies, roses, begonias, gladiolas, geraniums, gardenias and carnations. The agriculturally acceptable formulation is also beneficial for protecting shade trees, forest trees, and annual and biannual crops from bacterial diseases.

[133] As examples, an agriculturally acceptable formulation preparation is effective for controlling generally gram negative species and gram positive species, such as Erwinia species, Pseudomonas species, Xanthomonas species, Pectobacterium species, Enterobacter species, Pantoea species, Streptomyces species, Phitoplasmas species, Corynebacterium species, Ralstonia species, Clavibacter species, and Agrobacterium species. Specifically bacteria that belong to the following species: Acetobacter aceti, Acetobacter pasteurianus, Acidovorax anthurii, Acidovorax avenae, Acidovorax avenae subsp. avenae, Acidovorax avenae subsp. cattleyae, Acidovorax avenae subsp. citrulli, Acidovorax konjaci, Acidovorax valerianellae, Acidovorax cattleyae, Acidovorax citrulli, Acidovorax oryzae Rhizobium, Rhizobium larrymoorei, Rhizobium radiobacier, Rhizobium rhizogenes, Rhizobium rubi, Rhizobium viti. Arthrobacter sp. Arthrobacter ilicis, Bacillus sp., Bacillus megaterium, Bacillus megaierium pv. cerealis, Bacillus pumilus, Brenneria alni, Brenneria nigrifluens, Brenneria quercina, Brenneria rubrifaciens, Brenneria salicis, Brenneeria quercina pv. quercina, Brenneeria quercina pv. lupinicola, Burkholderia andropogonis, Burkholderia caryophylli, Burkholderia cepacia, Burkholderia gladioli, Burkholderia gladioli pv. agaricicola, Burkholderia gladioli pv alliicola, Burkholderia gladioli pv. Gladioli, Burkholderia glumae, Burkholderia plantarii, Ralstonia solanacearum, Candidatus liberibacter, Candidatus liberibacter africanis, Candidatus liberibacter africanis subsp. capen is, Candidatus liberibacter americanus, Candidatus liberibacter asiaticus, Candidatus phlomobacter, Candidatus phlomobacter fragariae, Candidatus Phitoplasma, Candidatus Phitoplasma allocasuarinae, Candidatus Phitoplasma americanum, Candidatus Phitoplasma asteris, Candidatus Phitoplasma auranlifolia, Candidatus Phitoplasma australasia, Candidatus Phitoplasma australi ense, Candidatus Phitoplasma brasiliense, Candidatus PhD , Candidatus Phitoplasma prunorum , Candidatus Phitoplasma pyri, Candidatus Phitoplasma rhamni, Candidatus Phitoplasma spartii, Candidatus Phitoplasma trifolii, Candidatus Phitoplasma ulmi, Candidatus Phitoplasma ziziphi, Candidatus Phitoplasma omanense, Candidatus Phitoplasma tamaricis, Candidatus liberibacter psyllaurous, Candidatus liberibacter solanacearum, Clavibacter sp., bacter iranicus, Clavibacter michiganensis , Clavibacter michiganensis subsp. insidiosus, Clavibacter michiganensis subsp. michiganensis, Clavibacter michiganensis subsp. nebraskensis, Clavibacter michiganensis subsp. sepedonicus, Clavibacter michiganensis subsp. tessellarium, Clostridium sp. Clostridium puniceum. Corynebacterium sp. Curtobacterium sp., Curtobacterium flaccumfaciens pv. hetae, Curtobacteriumflaccumfaciens pv. flaccumfaciens, Curtobacterium flaccumfaciens pv. ilicis, Curtobacterium flaccumfaciens pv. oortii, Curtobacterium flaccumfaciens pv. poinsettiae, Dickeyci sp., Dickeya chrysanthemi, Dickeya chrysanthemi pv. chrysanthemi, Dickeya chrysanthemi pv. parthenii, Dickeya dadantii, Dickeya diantbicola, Dickeya dieffenbachiae, Dickeya paradisiaca, Dickeya zeae, Enterobacter sp. Enterobacter cancerogenus, Enterobacter cloacae, Enterobacter cloacae subsp dissolvens, Enterobacter nimipressuralis, Enterobacter pyrinus, Erwinia sp., Erwinia amylovora, Erwinia mallotivora, Erwinia papayae, Erwinia persicina, Erwinia psidii, Erwinia pyrifoliae, Erwinia rhapontici, Erwinia tracheiphila, Ewingella sp., Ewingella americana, Gluconobacter sp. G. oxydans, Herbaspirillum sp., Herb aspir ilium rubrisub albicans, Janthinobacterium sp. J. agaricidamnosum, Leifsonia sp. Leifsonia cynodontis, Leifsonia xyli, Leifsonia xyli subsp. cynodontis, Leifsonia xyli subsp xyli, Nocar dia sp., Nocardia vaccinii, Pantoea sp., Pantoea agglomerans, Pantoea agglomerans pv. gypsophilae, Pantoea agglomerans pv. millettiae, Pantoea ananatis, Pantoea ananatis pv. ananatis, Pantoea ananatis pv. uredova, Pantoea stewartii, Pantoea stewartii subsp. indologenes, Pantoea stewartii subsp. stewartii, Pectobacterium sp., Pectobacterium atrosepticum, Pectobacterium betavasculorum, Pectobacterium cacticida, Pectobacterium carotovorum, Pectobacterium carotovorum subsp. carotovorum, Pectobacterium carotovorum subsp. odoriferum, Pectobacterium cypripedii, Pectobacterium wasabiae, Pseudomonas sp., Pseudomonas agarici, Pseudomonas amygdali, Pseudomonas asplenii, Pseudomonas avellanae, Pseudomonas beteli, Pseudomonas cannabina, Pseudomonas caricapapayae, Pseudomonas cichorii, s cissicola, Pseudomonas corrugata, Pseudomonas costantinii, Pseudomonas ficusereclae, Pseudomonas fleet ens, Pseudomonas fuscovaginae, Pseudomonas hibiscicola, Pseudomonas marginalis, Pseudomonas matginalis pv. alfalfae, Pseudomonas marginalis pv. marginalis Pseudomonas marginalis pv. pastinacae, Pseudomonas mediterranea, Pseudomonas meliae Pseudomonas palleroniana, Pseudomonas salomonii, Pseudomonas savastanoi, Pseudomonas savastanoi pv. fraxini, Pseudomonas savastanoi pv. glycinea, Pseudomonas savastanoi pv. nerii, Pseudomonas savastanoi pv. phaseolitica, Pseudomonas savastanoi pv. retacarpa, Pseudomonas savastanoi pv. savastanoi, Pseudomonas syringae, Pseudomonas syringae pv.aceris, Pseudomonas syringae pv. actinidiae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. aesculi, Pseudomonas syringae pv. alisalensis, Pseudomonas syringae pv. antirrhini, Pseudomonas syringae pv. apii, Pseudomonas syringae pv. aptata, Pseudomonas syringae pv. atrophaciens, Pseudomonas syringae pv. atropurpura, Pseudomonas avellanae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. avvi, Pseudomonas syringae pv. berberidis, Pseudomonas cannabina, Pseudomonas syringae pv. broussonetiae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. castaneae, Pseudomonas syringae pv cerasicola, Pseudomonas syringae pv. ciccaronei, Pseudomonas syringae pv coriandricola, Pseudomonas syringae pv. coronafaciens, Pseudomonas syringae pv. coryli, Pseudomonas syringae pv. cunninghamiae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. daphniphylli, Pseudomonas syringae pv. delphinii, Pseudomonas syringae pv. dendropanacis, Pseudomonas syringae pv. disoxyli, Pseudomonas syringae pv. eriobotryae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. garcae, Pseudomonas sevastanoi pv. glycineae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. helianthi, Pseudomonas syringae pv. hibisci, Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. lachrymans, Pseudomonas syringae pv lapsa, Pseudomonas syringae pv. maculicola, Pseudomonas syringae pv. mellea, Pseudomonas syringae pv. mori, Pseudomonas syringae pv. morsprunorum, Pseudomonas syringae pv. myricae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. oryzae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. papulans, Pseudomonas syringae pv. passiflorae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. persicae, Pseudomonas sevastanoi pv. phaseolicola, Pseudomonas syringae pv. philadelphi, Pseudomonas syringae pv. photiniae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. pisi, Pseudomonas syringae pv. porri, Pseudomonas syringae pv. primulae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. rhaphiolepidis, Pseudomonas syringae pv. ribicola, Pseudomonas syringae pv. sesami, Pseudomonas syringae pv. solidagae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. spinaceae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. striafaciens, Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. tabaci, Pseudomonas syringae pv. tagetis, Pseudomonas syringae pv. theae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato, Pseudomonas syringae pv. ulmi, Pseudomonas syringae pv. viburni, Pseudomonas syringae pv. zizaniae, Pseudomonas syringae pv., Ralstonia solanacearum, Ralstonia syzygii, Rathayibacter iranicus, Rathayibacter rathayi, Rathayibacter toxicus, Rathayibacter tritici, Rhizobacter dauci, Rhizobium larrymoorei, Rhizobium radiobacter, Rhizobium rhizogenes, izobium rubi, Rhizobium vitis, Rhodococcus fascians, Samsonia erylhrinae, Serratia marcescens, Serratia proteamaculans, Sphingomonas melonis, Sphingomonas suberifasciens, Spriroplasma citri, Spriroplasma kunkelii, Spriroplasma phoeniceum, Slreplomyces acidiscabies, Slreplomyces albidoflavus, Streptomyces Candidas, Streptomyces caviscabies, Streptomyces collinus, tomyces europaeiscabiei, Streptomyces intermedinas, Streptomyces ipomocae, Streptomyces luridiscabiei, Streptomyces niveiscabiei, Streptomyces puniciscabiei, Streptomyces reticuliscabei, Streptomyces scabiei, Streptomyces setonii, Streptomyces steliiscabiei, Streptomyces turgidiscabieis, Streptomyces wedmorensis, Xanthomonas albilineans, Xanthomonas alfalfae, Xanthomonas alfalfae subsp. alfalfae, Xanthomonas alfalfae subsp. citrumelonis, Xanthomonas arboricola, Xanthomonas arboricola pv. celebensis, Xanthomonas arboricola pv. corylina, Xanthomonas arboricola pv. fragariae, Xanthomonas arboricola pv. juglandis, Xanthomonas anoxopodis pv. poinsettiicola, Xanthomonas arboricola pv. populi, Xanthomonas arboricola pv. pruni, Xanthomonas anoxopodis, Xanthomonas fuscans subsp. aurantifolii, Xanthomonas axanopodis pv. allii, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. axonopodis, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. baubiniae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. begoniae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. betlicola, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. biophyti, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. cajani, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. cassiae, Xanthomonas citri, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. clitoriae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. coracanae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. cyamopdisis, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. desmodii, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. desmodiigangetici, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. desmodiilaxiflori, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. desmodiirotundifolii, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. dieffenbachiae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. erythrinae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. fascicularis, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. glycinas, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. khayae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. lespedezae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. maculifoliigardeniae, Xanthomonas citri subsp. malvacearum, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. manibotis, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. martyniicola, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. melbusii, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. nakataecorchori, Xanthomonas campestris pv. passiflorae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. patelii, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. pedalii, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. phaseoli, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. phyllanthi, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. physalidicola, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. poinsettiicola, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. punicae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. rhynchosiae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. ricini, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. seshaniae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. tamarindi, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. vasculorum, Xanthomonas vesicatoria, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. vignaeradiatae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. vignicola, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. vitians, Xanthomonas bromi, Xanthomonas campestris, Xanthomonas campestris pv. aberrans, Xanthomonas campestris pv. armoraciae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. barbareae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. campestris, Xanthomonas campestris pv. incanae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. plantaginis, Xanthomonas campestris pv. raphani, Xanthomonas campestris pv. alangii, Xanthomonas campestris pv. amaranthicola, Xanthomonas campestris pv. amorphophalli, Xanthomonas campestris pv. aracearum. Xanthomonas campestris pv. arecae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. argemones, Xanthomonas campestris pv. arracaciae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. asclepiadis, Xanthomonas campestris pv. azadirachteae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. badrii, Xanthomonas campestris pv. betae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. bilvae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. blepharidis, Xanthomonas campestris pv. boerbaaviae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. brunneivaginae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. cannabis, Xanthomonas campestris pv. cannae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. carissae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. centellae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. clerodendri, Xanthomonas campestris pv. convolvuli, Xanthomonas campestris pv. coriandri, Xanthomonas campestris pv. daturae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. durantae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. esculenti, Xanthomonas campestris pv. eucalypti, Xanthomonas campestris pv. euphorbiae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. fici, Xanthomonas campestris pv. guizotiae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. gummisudans, Xanthomonas campestris pv. heliotropii, Xanthomonas campestris pv. ionidii, Xanthomonas campestris pv. lantanae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. laureliae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. lawsoniae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. leeana, Xanthomonas campestris pv. leersiae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. malloti, Xanthomonas campestris pv. mangiferaeindicae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. merremiae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. mirabilis, Xanthomonas campestris pv. mori, Xanthomonas campestris pv. musacearum, Xanthomonas campestris pv. nigromaculans, Xanthomonas campestris pv. obscurae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. olilor ii, Xanthomonas campestris pv. papavericola, Xanthomonas campestris pv. parthenii, Xanthomonas campestris pv. paulliniae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. pennamericanum, Xanthomonas campestris pv. phormiicola, Xanthomonas campestris pv. physalidis, Xanthomonas campestris pv. sesami, Xanthomonas campestris pv. spermacoces, Xanthomonas campestris syngonii, Xanthomonas campestris pv. tardicrescens, Xanthomonas campestris pv. thespesiae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. thirumalacharii, Xanthomonas campestris pv. tribuli, Xanthomonas campestris pv. trichodermae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. uppalii, Xanthomonas campestris pv. vernomiae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. viegasii, Xanthomonas campestris pv. viticola, Xanthomonas campestris pv. vitiscarnosae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. vitistrifoliae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. vitiswoodrowii, Xanthomonas campestris pv. zantedeschiae, Xanthomonas campestris pv zingibericola, Xanthomonas campestris pv. zinniae, Xanthomonas cassavae, Xanthomonas citri subsp malvarearum, Xanthomonas codiaei, Xanthomonas curcubitae, Xanthomonas cynarae, aurantifolii, Xanthomonas fuscans subsp. fuscans, Xanthomonas gardneri, Xanthomonas hortorum pv. carotae, Xanthomonas hortorum pv. hederae, Xanthomonas hortorum pv. pelargonii, Xanthomonas hortorum pv. taraxaci, Xanthomonas hyacinthi, Xanthomonas melonis, Xanthomonas oryzae, Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae, Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzicola, Xanthomonas perforans, Xanthomonas pisi, Xanthomonas populi, Xanthomonas sacchari, Xanthomonas theicola, Xanthomonas translucens, arrhenatheri, Xanthomonas translucens pv. cerealis, Xanthomonas translucens pv. graminis, Xanthomonas translucens pv. phlei, Xanthomonas translucens pv. phleipratensis, Xanthomonas translucens pv. poae, Xanthomonas translucens pv. secalis, Xanthomonas translucens pv. translucens, Xanthomonas translucens pv. undulosa, Xanthomonas vasicola, Xanthomonas vasicola pv. holcicola, Xanthomonas vesicatoria, Xylella fastidiosa, Xanthomonas fastidiosa subsp. fastidiosa, Xanthomonas fastidiosa subsp. multiplex, Xylophilus ampelinus, Gibbsiella qiiercinecans. Pantoea citrea, Pantoea cypripedii, Pseudomonas cannabina, Pseudomonas cannabina pv. alisalensis, Pseudomonas cannabina pv. cannabina, Tatumella morbirosei, Tatumella ptyseos, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. anacardii, Xanthomonas anoxopodis mangiferaeindicae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. spondiae, Xanthomonas dyei, Xanthomonas dyei pv. dysoxyli, Xanthomonas dyei pv. eucalypti, Xanthomonas dyei pv. laureliae, Xanthomonas translucen pv. pistaciae.

[134] Other plants, such as Cotoneaster, Pyracantha, Stranvaesia, Fraxinus, Pyrus, Malus, Capsicum, Cydonia, Crataegus, and Soreus, can benefit from the application of the agriculturally acceptable tannin-based formulation. For example: the agriculturally acceptable tannin-based formulation can also be used immediately on plants or trees of the following genera: Asparagus officinalis, Alocasia macrorhiza, Acoelorraphe wrightii, Aiphanes aculeata, Archontophoenix alexandrae, Areca catechu, Acer negundo, Acer saccharinum, Arbustus xalapensis , Acasia farmesiana, Alnus acuminata, Aloe barbadensis, Apuntia spp., Anthurium andraeanum, Apium graveolens, Avena saliva. Annona reticulata, Amelanchier alnifolia, A. canadensis, A. laevia, Aronia arbutifolia, A. melanocarpa, Aruncus Sylvester, Allium sativum, Allium porrum, Apium gravolens, Arachis hypogaea, Annona squamosa, Annona muricata, Acalypha hispida, Arachis hypogaea, Allium schoeroprassum , Apium graveolens, Allium spp., Adianthum spp, Brassica oleracea, B. campestris, B. napus, Byrsonima crassifolia, Brassica oleracea, B. oleracea var. botrytisBrassica capitato, Begonia argenteo-guttata, Bidens pilosa, Boldoa purpurascens, Bixa orellana, Bucida buceras,Buddleia chordata, Brahea armata, Beta vulgaris, Bougainvillea spectabilis, Bombax emarginatum, Beaucamea recurvata, Bahuinia divaricata, Curcubita moschata, C. maxima, C. pepo, Cucumis melo, Cucumis salivas. Chrysophyllum cainito, Coco nucifera, Carica papaya, Citrus aurantifolia, Citrus limonum, Calocarpum mammosum, Citrus reticulata, Citrullus vulgaris, Citrus aurantium, Citrus sinensis, Crataegus Mexicana, Casimiroa edulis, Cucumis sativus, Colocasia esculenta, Cajanus cajan, Chamadorea graminofilia, Caladium spp ., Chlorophytum comosum, Chysanthemum sinense, Cordyline terminalis, Cycas spp., Crocus sativus, Cinnamomum canella winter eana, Castus ruber, Callistephus hortensis, Coriandrum sativum, Coleus blumei, Chysantellum americanum, Casuarina equisetifolia, Cedrela odorata, Ceiba pentandra, Callistemon lanceolatus, Cassia fistula, Magnolia sp., Cocos nucifera, Chrysalidocarpus, Cyca circinalis, Cyca revoluta, Cynara cardunculus, C. scolymus, Citrus paradisi, Citrus grandis, Cestrum nocturnus, Chaenomeles japonica, C. lagenaria, Cotoneaster acuminatus, C. Adpressus Bois, C . affimis, C. ambiguus, C. apiculatus, C. ascendens, C. bullatus, C. floribunda, C. buxifiolius, C. buxifolius f. vellaea, C. commixtus, C. congestus, C. conspicuus, C. dammeri, C. dielsianus, C. divaricatus, C. elegans, C. floccosus, C. foveolatus, C. franchetti, C. frigidus, C. glabratus, C. glaucophyllus, C. harrysmithii, C. henryanus, C. hissarcus, C. ignavus, C. insignia, C. horizontalis, C. khasiensis, C. lacteus, C. laxiflorus, C. lucidus, C. melanocarpus, C. microphyllus, C. moupinensis, C. multiflorus, C. nanshan, C. nitens, C. obscurus, C. obtusus, C. pannosus, C. perpusillus, C. polyanthemus, C. postratus, C. racemiflorus, C. roseus, C. rotundifolius, C. rubens, C. salsifolius, C. siminsii, C. soongoricus, C. spendens, C. stemianus, C. tenuipes, C. tormentosus, C. veitchii, C. villosulus, C. wardii, C. watereri, C, zabelii, Cowania slanburiana, Crataegomespilus dardarii, Crataegus arnoldiana, C. crusgalli, C. douglassi, C. flavellata, C. mollis, C. monogyna, C. oxyacantha, C. pedicellata, C. phaenopyrum, C. punctata , C. succulenta, C. uniflora, Capsicum annuum, Citrus sp., Cydonia oblonga, C. sinensis, Carya illinoinensis, Cocos nucifera, Chenopodium ambrosoides, Chamaerops humilis, Chamaedorea elegans, Citrus paradisi-reticulata, Catleya spp., Carum carvi, Chrysalidocarpus lutescens, Curcuma longa, Ceratozania americana, Caryota urens, Coccothrinax readii, Chamaedorea tepejilote, Coffea arabica, Dryas sp., Dianthus caryophy llus, Dieffenbachia spp., Dracaena deremensis, Daucus carota, Delonix regia, Dioscorea spp, Dypsis decaryi, Dicon espinolosum , Dicon edule, Daucus carota, Dracaena marginata, Delonix regia, Eriobotrya japonica, Exochorda sp., Eryobotria japonica, Echeveria spp., Euphorbia pulcherrima, Enterolobium cyclocarpum, Erythrina crista-galli, Elaeis guineensislutences, Eryngium foetidum, Erythrina Americana, Fragaria X ananassa , F. virginiana, Ficus carica, Fraxinus uhdei, Ficus lirata, Fragaria vesca, Ficus benjamina, Ficus retusa, Foeniculum vulgare, Geum sp., G. herbaceum, G. barbadense, G. hirstiumlpomoes potatoes, Gossypium hirsutum, Glycine max, Geranium sp., Gardenia jasminoides, Gladiolus communis, Gerbera jamesonii, Guazuma ulmifolia, Grevillea robusta, Flowea fosteriana, Hyophorbe lagenicaulis, Hibiscus rosa-sinensis, Helianthus annuus, Hoffmannia ghiresbreghtii, Helychrysum bracteanum, Heteromeles arbutifolia, Holodiscus discolor, Hibiscus elatus, Hyptis suaveolens, Helianthus tuberosus, Hibiscus esculentus, Higrangea macrophylla, Hedychium coronarium, lxora incarnata, Iris spp., Impatiens balsamina, Juglandis nigra, Juglans regia, Justicia pectoralis, Jacaranda mimosifolia, Kageneckia oblonga, Kerria japonica, Kalanchoe pinnata, Lactuca sativa, Lycopersicon esculentum, Licuala grandis, Licuala peltata, L. paludosa, L. orbicularis, Ligustrum japonicum, Livistona chinensis, Lippia sp., Lens culinaris, Liquidambar styraciflua, Lagerstroemia indica, Malpighia punicifolia, Mammea americana, Melicocea bijuga, Mangifera indica Ananas comosus, Musa paradisiaca, Musa balsisiana, Myrciaria cauliflora, Malus domestica tomanlhes tristaneae carpa Malus malus spp., Mespillus germanica, Morus alba, Manihot esculenta, Medicago sativa, Monstera spp., Murraya paniculata, Mysotis scorpioides, Mejorana hortensis, Mentha arvensis, Mentha nemorosa, Morus alba, Nepholepsis spp., Nasturtium officinale, Nerium oleander, Osteomeles anthyllidfolia, Oryza sativa, Olea europea, Ocimum basilicum, Ocimum santum, P. capuli, P. allehaniensis, P. avium, P. besseyi, Prunus armeniaca, P. salicina, P. simonii , P. spinosa, P. triloba, P. americana, P. ceracifera, P. dasycarpa, P. domestica, P. fremontii, P. ilicifolia, P. lusitanica, P. mume, P. nigra, Prunus persica, Pyracantha angustifolia , P. atalantioides, P. coccinea, P. crenulala, P. crenulaia var. kansuensis, P. fortuneana, P. koidzummi, P. rogersiana, P. umbellata, Phaseolus vulgaris, Psidium cattleianum, Photinia deflexa, P. glabra, P. villona, Physocarpus sp.Protentilia sp., Pr insepia sp., Pyrus communis, Pisum sativum, Pistacia vera, Prunus avium, Pachyrhizus erosus, Phyllantus acidus, Philodendron spp., Polianthes tuber osa, Pilea rotundifolia, Portulaca pilosa, Parkinsonia aculeata, Phoenix roebelenii, Pilea microphylla, Pimpinella asisum, Piper auritum, Pluchea carolinensis, Populus tremuloides, Populus canadensis, Populus italica, Pithecellobium dulce, Prosopis juliflora, Plumeria rubra, Platanus mexicanus, Phoenix datilifera, Pritchardia pacifica, Phoenix roebelenii, Pandanus utilis, Pastinaca sativa, Persea americana, Pouteria campechiana, Psidium guajaba, Punica granatum, Passiflora laurifolia, Peraphyllum ramossissimum , Pachypodium lamerei, Phoenix canadiensis, Quercus laurina, Quercus Mexicana, Quercus rubra, Quercus rugosa, Quercus virginiana, Raphiolepia indica, Rhodotypos scandens, Rosa blanda, R. mulliflora, R. rubiginasa, R. rubrifolia, Rubus idaeos, Rheum rhabarbarum, Rumex acetosa, Ravenea rivularis, Rhapis excelsa, Roystonea regia, Rhoeo discolor, Rosmarinus officinalis, Rubus ulmifolius, Rosa spp, Rhoeo discolor, Raphanus sativus, Roystonea regia, Rhizophora mangle, Salycopersicum esculentum, Sorb aria sp., Sorbus americana, S. aria, S. aucuparia, S. mougeotii, S. occidentalis, S. tianshanica, Spiraea cantoniensis, S. densiflora, S. van houteii, Solanum meolongena, Sechium edule, Spinacia olereasa, Scindapsus spp., Spathyphyllum wallisii, Schefflera actinophylla, Sedum morganiarum, Sorghum bicolor , Salix bonplandiana, Schinus molle, Schinus terebinthefolius, Salix chilensis, Salix babylonica, Syagrus romanzofftana, Scheelea liebmannii, Sabal palmetto, Sabal minor, Scorzonera hispanica, Saccharum officinarum, Spondias dulcis, Solanum tuberosum, Sansevieria spp, Strelitzia reginae, Tebebuia rosea, Tebebuia donnell-smithiiTamarix gallica, Thrinax radiata, Tragopogon porrifolius, Thuja orientalis, Talinum palicunatum, Tithonia diversofilia, Theobroma cacao, Tripticum aestivum, Tamarindus indica, Terminalia catapa, Ulmus parviflora, Vitis vinifera, Valerianella locusta, Vaccinium myrtillus, Vicia faba, Veitchia merrilli, Vetiveria zizanioides, Veitchia merilli, Verbena domingensis, Weddelia rugosa tenuis,

[135] Without being linked to any theory, tannins are believed to affect bacteria by actively modifying the environment where they grow, multiply and feed, developing a condition of hyperchange.

[136] Tannins react with the bacterial cell membrane and cause bacterial cell death.

[137] Bacteria are basically divided into two groups (gram negative and gram positive), the difference between which is based on the composition of their cell wall. Gram-negative bacteria have a single layer of peptidoglycan and a surface membrane composed of lipoproteins and glycoproteins, while gram-positive bacteria do not have a surface membrane and contain many layers of peptidoglycan, so that their thickness is considerable.

[138] The function of the cell wall is to shape and protect the interior of the cell from changes in pressure or exchange of extracellular fluids. This determines the survival of the cell. As mentioned previously, the cell wall basically consists of proteins in their different forms (phosphoproteins, glycoproteins, lipoproteins and similar). Gram negative bacteria contain a greater amount of proteins, while gram positive bacteria on the surface contain teichoic acid, which is formed by glycerol polymers and some proteins.

[139] For this reason, an organic agriculturally acceptable formulation containing ellagic tannins basically damages gram-negative bacteria and fungus, and also damages gram-positive bacteria that may be susceptible to the product.

[140] Upon contact of tannins with the cell wall, the cell wall is lysed and destroyed, and cell survival is compromised due to osmotic pressure and damage by external agents.

EXAMPLES

[141] Some of the tests discussed here were carried out in a laboratory, and objectively show the bactericidal effect of the currently described agriculturally acceptable formula based on tannins in different concentrations against five genera of bacteria that are the most important that attack plants of economic importance.

[142] For the relevant Examples, phytopathogenic strains, such as Xanthomonas sp., Clavibacter sp., Erwinia sp., Pseudomonas sp., and Ralstonia sp., were isolated from different fruit and vegetable crops. A mixture for agricultural use was developed according to the following descriptions.

[143] The sensitivity of bacteria to a given formulation was evaluated in Petri dishes using a poisoned food method, using agar culture media mixed with the appropriate amount of the formulation. The poisoned food method is commonly used to evaluate antifungal effects against molds, and the method has been modified to test for bacteria instead of mold. In the method, the relevant formulation was incorporated into molten agar at a desired final concentration and mixed well. Then, the resulting medium was poured into Petri dishes. After overnight pre-incubation, the Petri dishes containing the medium were inoculated with the relevant bacteria. After additional incubation under conditions suitable for the bacterial strain tested, positive or negative growth on control and sample plates was measured. So, briefly, this methodology used agar as a vehicle for product dose and, after solidification, a very high concentration of bacterial suspension was inoculated, while leaving a control Petri dish inoculated with the same bacterial suspension containing only agar without the formulation.

[144] The respective formulation was mixed with agar to prepare the appropriate concentration for each example. For example, to form a 0.1 gram per liter formulation, 0.1 gram of the formulation was added to 1 liter of agar. It is understood that results using agar will correspond to the results that would be obtained if using water instead of agar. Thus, it is understood that the results obtained using agar correspond to the results that would be obtained if water was used as a medium.

[145] Results were measured after 96 hours. The number of bacterial colonies was counted using a technique that is based on counting the “colony forming units”, or CFU, present in one gram or milliliter of the sample. It was considered that each colony that develops in the culture medium of choice after a certain time of incubation at the appropriate temperature comes from a microorganism, or an aggregate of them, from the sample under study. Also, it was considered that the microorganism or microorganisms were capable of forming the colony, that is, that the microorganism(s) is (are) a CFU. To reliably count colonies, the necessary decimal dilutions of a sample were made before placing them in the culture medium. The most common procedure for enumerating bacteria is the viable plate count. In this method, serial dilutions of a sample containing viable microorganisms were plated on a suitable growth medium. The suspension was either spread on the surface of agar plates (surface spread plating method) or mixed with molten agar, poured onto the plates, and allowed to solidify (deep plating method). The plates were then incubated under conditions that allowed microbial reproduction, so that colonies that could be seen with the help of a microscope were formed. Each bacterial colony is considered to arise from an individual cell that has undergone cell division. Therefore, by counting the number of colonies and counting the dilution factor, the number of bacteria in the original sample was determined.

[146] For the Examples noted, the results were positive, as discussed below, and showed a bactericidal effect in some cases of a dose of 1 or 2 grams per liter, where no bacterial growth was shown, compared to a control that contained the bacterial suspension without any formulation.

[147] As described below, some mixtures were assigned codes A5, B15, A and +20. A5 described a composition that included Premix A (21.98% by mass), gentamicin sulfate (8.08% by mass), sodium lignosulfonate (4% by mass), naphthalene sulfonate (2% by mass) , xanthan gum (0.50% by mass), and diatomaceous earth (63.44% by mass). B15 described a composition that included Premix A (21.98% by mass), oxytetracycline (15.69% by mass), sodium lignosulfonate (4% by mass), naphthalene sulfonate (2% by mass), gum xanthan (0.50% by mass), and diatomaceous earth (55.83% by mass). Composition A was a composition containing 20% by mass of premix A, 4% by mass of sodium lignosulfonate, 2% by mass of naphthalene sulfonate, 0.50% by mass of xanthan gum, and 73.5% by mass in mass of diatomaceous earth. “+20” described a composition that included Premix A (21.98% by mass), copper oxychloride (20% by mass), sodium lignosulfonate (4% by mass), naphthalene sulfonate (2% by mass ), xanthan gum (0.50% by mass), and diatomaceous earth (51.52% by mass).

[148] In each formulation for the Examples here, diatomaceous earth (when used) was sterilized at 200°C for 2 hours before its addition to the formulation. Premix

[149] Where indicated, Premix A was used. As noted previously, Premix A contained about 65% tannins (the blend of about 35.5% castalagin, about 23.3% vascalagin, about 2.0% castalin, and about 5.0% vescaline), about 15% sugars, and about 15% bentonite, with the remainder being water.

Example 1A

[150] The efficacy of the formulation on Clavibacter sp. was tested using different concentrations of the tannin premix in the formulations (e.g., 5%, 10%, and 20%) and applying different concentrations of each formulation.

[151] The formulation containing 5% tannin premix included a mixture of 5% by mass of premix A and 95% by mass diatomaceous earth (50 grams of tannins per kilogram of formulation and 950 grams of diatomaceous earth per kilogram of formulation).

[152] The formulation containing 10% tannin premix included a mixture of 10% by mass of premix A and 90% by mass diatomaceous earth (100 grams of tannins per kilogram of formulation and 900 grams of diatomaceous earth per kilogram of formulation).

[153] The formulation containing 20% tannin premix included a mixture of 20% by mass of premix A and 80% by mass diatomaceous earth (200 grams of tannins per kilogram of formulation and 800 grams of diatomaceous earth per kilogram of formulation).

[154] Figures 1 (a) to (c) show the results when the tannin premix was present in the formulation in an amount of 5% by mass. The Petri dish on the upper left side in each of Figures 1(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 1(a) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 1 (b) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 1(c) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[155] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 1(a) to (c). Table 1

[156] As can be seen from Figures 1(a) to (c), effective doses of the 5% formulation in this test were considered 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Clavibacter sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Clavibacter sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

[157] Figures 2(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 10% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 2(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 2(a) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 2(b) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 2(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[158] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 2(a) to (c). Table 2

[159] As can be seen from Figures 2(a) to (c), effective doses of the 10% formulation in this test were considered 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Clavibacter sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Clavibacter sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

[160] Figures 3(a) to (c) show the results when the tannin premix was present in the formulation in an amount of 20% by mass. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 3(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 3(a) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 3(b) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 3(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[161] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 3(a) to (c). Table 3

[162] As can be seen from Figures 3(a) to (c), effective doses of the 20% formulation in this test were considered 0.5 g/L, 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Clavibacter sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 0.5 g/L, 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Clavibacter sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 1B

[163] Example 1 A was reproduced with the exception that the bacteria added to the agar were diluted. In Example 1 A, the bacteria that were added to the agar were obtained from a bacterial broth. For this Example, the bacteria added to the agar were obtained by diluting 1 mL of the bacterial broth used in Example 1A in 9 mL of saline solution, thereby forming a first diluted bacterial solution.

[164] Figures 4(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 5% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 4(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 4(a) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 4(b) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 4(c) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[165] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 4(a) to (c). Table 4

[166] As can be seen from Figures 4(a) to (c), effective doses of the 5% formulation in this test were considered 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Clavibacter sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Clavibacter sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

[167] Figures 5(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 10% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 5(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 5(a) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 5(b) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 5(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[168] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 5(a) to (c). Table 5

[169] As can be seen from Figures 5(a) to (c), effective doses of the 10% formulation in this test were considered 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Clavibacter sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Clavibacter sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

[170] Figures 6(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 20% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 6(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 6(a) shows results when the formulation. containing 20% by mass of tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation. Figure 6(b) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 6(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[171] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 6(a) to (c). Table 6

[172] As can be seen from Figures 6(a) to (c), effective doses of the 20% formulation in this test were considered 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Clavibacter sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Clavibacter sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 1C

[173] Example 1 A was reproduced with the exception that the bacteria added to the agar were diluted. For this Example, bacteria added to agar were obtained by adding 1 mL of the first diluted bacterial solution of Example 1B to 9 mL of saline solution, thereby forming a second diluted bacterial solution.

[174] Figures 7(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 5% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 7(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 7(a) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 7(b) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 7(c) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[175] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 7(a) to (c). Table 7

[176] As can be seen from Figures 7(a) to (c), effective doses of the 5% formulation in this test were considered 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Clavibacter sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Clavibacter sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

[177] Figures 8(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 10% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 8(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 8(a) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 8(b) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 8(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[178] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 8(a) to (c). Table 8

[179] As can be seen from Figures 8(a) to (c), effective doses of the 10% formulation in this test were considered 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/ L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Clavibacter sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Clavibacter sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

[180] Figures 9(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 20% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 9(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 9(a) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 9(b) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 9(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[181] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 9(a) to (c). Table 9

[182] As can be seen from Figures 9(a) to (c), effective doses of the 20% formulation in this test were considered 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Clavibacter sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Clavibacter sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 2 A

[183] The effectiveness of the formulation on Erwinia sp. was tested in the same manner as Example 1 A, with the exception that Erwinia sp. it was the bacteria.

[184] Figures 10(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 5% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 10(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 10(a) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 1 (b) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 10(c) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[185] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 10(a) to (c). Table 10

[186] As can be seen from Figures 10(a) to (c), effective doses of the 5% formulation in this test were considered 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Erwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Erwinia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

[187] Figures 11 (a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 10% by weight of the premix. The Petri dish on the upper left in each of Figures 1 l(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 11(a) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 11 (b) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 11(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[188] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 11(a) to (c). Table 11

[189] As can be seen from Figures 11(a) to (c), effective doses of the 10% formulation in this test were considered 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/ L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Erwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Erwinia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

[190] Figures 12(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 20% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 12(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 12(a) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 12(b) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 12(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[191] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 12(a) to (c). Table 12

[192] As can be seen from Figures 12(a) to (c), effective doses of the 20% formulation in this test were considered 0.2 g/L, 0.3 g/L, 0.4 g/L, 0 .5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Erwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 0.2 g/L, 0.3 g/L, 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g /L, Erwinia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 2B

[193] The conditions of Example 1B were reproduced, with the exception that Erwinia sp. it was the bacteria.

[194] Figures 13 (a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 5% by mass of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 13(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 13(a) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 13(b) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 13(c) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[195] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 13(a) to (c). Table 13

[196] As can be seen from Figures 1 3(a) to (c), effective doses of the 5% formulation in this test were considered 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g /L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Erwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Erwinia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

[197] Figures 14(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 10% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 14(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 14(a) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 14(b) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 14(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[198] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 14(a) to (c). Table 14

[199] As can be seen from Figures 14(a) to (c), effective doses of the 10% formulation in this test were considered 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Erwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Erwinia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

[200] Figures 15(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 20% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 15(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 15(a) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 15(b) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 15(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[201] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 15(a) to (c). Table 15

[202] As can be seen from Figures 15(a) to (c), effective doses of the 20% formulation in this test were considered 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, 0.3 g/L, 0 .4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Erwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, 0.3 g/L, 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Erwinia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 3A

[203] The effectiveness of the formulation on Pseudomonas sp. was tested in the same manner as Example 1 A, with the exception that Pseudomonas sp. it was the bacteria.

[204] Figures 16(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 5% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 16(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 16(a) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 16(b) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 16(c) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[205] The following Table shows the number of CPUs in the Petri dishes in Figures 16(a) to (c). Table 16

[206] As can be seen from Figures 16(a) to (c), effective doses of the 5% formulation in this test were considered 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Pseudomonas sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Pseudomonas sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

[207] Figures 17(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 10% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 17(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 17(a) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 17(b) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 17(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[208] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 17(a) to (c). Table 17

[209] As can be seen from Figures 17(a) to (c), effective doses of the 10% formulation in this test were considered 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Pseudomonas sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Pseudomonas sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

[210] Figures 18(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 20% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 18(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 18(a) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 18(b) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 18(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[211] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 18(a) to (c). Table 18

[212] As can be seen from Figures 18(a) to (c), effective doses of the 20% formulation in this test were considered 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Pseudomonas sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Pseudomonas sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 3B

[213] The conditions of Example 1B were reproduced, with the exception that Pseudomonas sp. it was the bacteria.

[214] Figures 19(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 5% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 19(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 19(a) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 19(b) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 19(c) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[215] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 19(a) to (c). Table 19

[216] As can be seen from Figures 19(a) to (c), effective doses of the 5% formulation in this test were considered 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Pseudomonas sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Pseudomonas sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

[217] Figures 20(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 10% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 20(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 20(a) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 20(b) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 20(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[218] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 20(a) to (c). Table 20

[219] As can be seen from Figures 20(a) to (c), effective doses of the 10% formulation in this test were considered 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Pseudomonas sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Pseudomonas sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

[220] Figures 21(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 20% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 2l(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 21(a) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 21 (b) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 21(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[221] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 21(a) to (c). Table 21

[222] As can be seen from Figures 2l(a) to (c), effective doses of the 20% formulation in this test were considered 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Pseudomonas sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Pseudomonas sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 4A

[223] The effectiveness of the formulation on Ralstonia sp. was tested in the same manner as Example 1 A, with the exception that Ralstonia sp. it was the bacteria.

[224] Figures 22(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 5% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 22(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 22(a) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 22(b) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 22(c) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[225] The following Table shows the number of CPUs in the Petri dishes in Figures 22(a) to (c). Table 22

[226] As can be seen from Figures 22(a) to (c), higher concentrations may be required to be effective for this test.

[227] Figures 23(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 10% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 23(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 23(a) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 23(b) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 23(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[228] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 23(a) to (c). Table 23

[229] As can be seen from Figures 23(a) to (c), effective doses of the 10% formulation in this test were considered 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Ralstonia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Ralstonia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

[230] Figures 24(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 20% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 24(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 24(a) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 24(b) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 24(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[231] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 24(a) to (c). Table 24

[232] As can be seen from Figures 24(a) to (c), effective doses of the 20% formulation in this test were considered 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Ralstonia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Ralstonia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 4B

[233] The conditions of Example 1B were reproduced, with the exception that Ralstonia sp. it was the bacteria.

[234] Figures 25(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 5% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 25(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 25(a) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 25(b) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 25(c) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[235] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 25(a) to (c). Table 25

[236] As can be seen from Figures 25(a) to (c), a higher concentration may be required to be effective in this test.

[237] Figures 26(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 10% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 26(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 26(a) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 26(b) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 26(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[238] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 26(a) to (c). Table 26

[239] As can be seen from Figures 26(a) to (c), effective doses of the 10% formulation in this test were considered 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Ralstonia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Ralstonia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

[240] Figures 27(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 20% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 27(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 27(a) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 27(b) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 27(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[241] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 27(a) to (c). Table 27

[242] As can be seen from Figures 27(a) to (c), effective doses of the 20% formulation in this test were considered 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Ralstonia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Ralstonia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 4C

[243] The conditions of Example 1 C were reproduced, with the exception that Ralstonia sp. it was the bacteria.

[244] Figures 28(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 5% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 28(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 28(a) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 28(b) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 28(c) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[245] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 28(a) to (c). Table 28

[246] As can be seen from Figures 28(a) to (c), a higher concentration may be required to be effective in this test.

[247] Figures 29(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 10% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 29(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 29(a) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 29(b) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 29(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[248] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 29(a) to (c). Table 29

[249] As can be seen from Figures 29(a) to (c), effective doses of the 10% formulation in this test were considered 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Ralstonia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Ralstonia sp. was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar

[250] Figures 30(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 20% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 30(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 30(a) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 30(b) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 30(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[251] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 30(a) to (c). Table 30

[252] As can be seen from Figures 30(a) to (c), effective doses of the 20% formulation in this test were considered 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Ralstonia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Ralstonia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 5A

[253] The efficacy of the formulation on Xanthomonas sp. was tested in the same manner as Example 1A, with the exception that Xanthomonas sp. it was the bacteria.

[254] Figures 31(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 20% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 31(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 31 (a) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 31(b) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 31(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[255] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 31(a) to (c). Table 31

[256] As can be seen from Figures 3 l(a) to (c), effective doses of the 20% formulation in this test were considered 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L , which were the concentrations at which Xanthomonas sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Xanthomonas sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 5B

[257] The conditions of Example 1 B were reproduced, with the exception that Xanthomonas sp. it was the bacteria.

[258] Figures 32(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 20% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 32(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 32(a) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 32(b) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 32(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[259] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 32(a) to (c). Table 32

[260] As can be seen from Figures 32(a) to (c), effective doses of the 20% formulation in this test were considered 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Xanthomonas sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Xanthomonas sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 5 C

[261] The conditions of Example 1 C were reproduced, with the exception that Xanthomonas sp. it was the bacteria.

[262] Figures 33(a) to (c) show the results when tannins were present in the formulation in an amount of 20% by weight of the premix. The top left Petri dish in each of Figures 33(a) to (c) are the control Petri dishes, in which no formulation was applied. Figure 33(a) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.3 g/L of the formulation . Figure 33(b) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L and 1.0 g/L of the formulation . Figure 33(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of the tannin premix was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L of the formulation.

[263] The following Table shows the number of CFU's in the Petri dishes in Figures 33(a) to (c). Table 33

[264] As can be seen from Figures 33(a) to (c), effective doses of the 20% formulation in this test were considered 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Xanthomonas sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L and 6 g/L, Xanthomonas sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 6

[265] The test conditions of Example 1C were repeated, except that each of compositions A5, B15, A and +20 were individually used in place of the formulations used in Example 1 C. Compositions A, A5, B15 and +20 were tested against Clavibacter sp., using a control, at concentrations of 1 g/L, 2 g/L and 4 g/L.

[266] Figure 34 shows test results using composition A5. The control exhibited bacterial growth, while the lack of bacterial growth in Petri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L and 4 g/L of composition A5 showed the antibacterial effect of composition A5.

[267] Figure 35 shows test results using composition B15. The control exhibited bacterial growth, while the lack of bacterial growth in Petri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L and 4 g/L of composition B15 showed the antibacterial effect of composition B15.

[268] Figure 36 shows the test results using the +20 composition. The control and the 1 g/L composition exhibited bacterial growth, while the lack of bacterial growth in the Petri dishes exposed to 2 g/L and 4 g/L of the +20 composition showed the antibacterial effect of the +20 composition.

[269] Figure 37 shows the results of the test using composition A. The control exhibited bacterial growth, while the lack of bacterial growth in Petri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L and 4 g/L of the composition A showed the antibacterial effect of composition A.

Example 7

[270] The test conditions of Example 2C were repeated, except that each of compositions A5, B15, A and +20 was individually used in place of the formulation used in Example 2. Compositions A5, B15 and +20 were tested against Erwinia sp., using a control, at concentrations of 1 g/L, 2 g/L and 4 g/L.

[271] Figure 38 shows test results using composition A5. The control exhibited bacterial growth, while the lack of bacterial growth in Petri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L and 4 g/L of composition A5 showed the antibacterial effect of composition A5.

[272] Figure 39 shows test results using composition B15. The control exhibited bacterial growth, while the lack of bacterial growth in Petri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L and 4 g/L of composition B 15 showed the antibacterial effect of composition B 15.

[273] Figure 40 shows the test results using the +20 composition. The control and the 1 g/L composition exhibited bacterial growth, while the lack of bacterial growth in the Petri dishes exposed to 2 g/L and 4 g/L of the +20 composition showed the antibacterial effect of the +20 composition.

[274] Figure 41 shows the results of the test using composition A. The control exhibited bacterial growth, while the lack of bacterial growth in Petri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L and 4 g/L of the composition A showed the antibacterial effect of composition A.

Example 8

[275] The test conditions of Example 4C were repeated, except that each of compositions A5, B15, A and +20 was individually used in place of the formulation used in Example 4. Compositions A5, B15, A and +20 were tested against Ralstonia sp., using a control, at, for example, concentrations of 1 g/L, 2 g/L and 4 g/L.

[276] Figure 42 shows test results using composition A5. The control exhibited bacterial growth, while the lack of bacterial growth in Petri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L and 4 g/L of composition A5 showed the antibacterial effect of composition A5.

[277] Figure 43 shows test results using composition B15. The control exhibited bacterial growth, while the lack of bacterial growth in Petri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L and 4 g/L of composition B15 showed the antibacterial effect of composition B 15.

[278] Figures 44(a) and (b) show the test results using the +20 composition. The control exhibited bacterial growth, as occurred with Petri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L and 4 g/L of the +20 composition, while the lack of bacterial growth in Petri dishes exposed to 14 g/L , 16 g/L and 18 g/L of +20 composition showed the antibacterial effect of +20 composition.

[279] Figures 45(a) and (b) show the test results using composition A. The control and compositions containing 12 g/L, 14 g/L and 16 g/L exhibited bacterial growth, while the lack of bacterial growth in Petri dishes exposed to 12 g/L, 14 g/L and 16 g/L of composition A showed the antibacterial effect of composition A.

Example 9

[280] The test conditions of Example 5C were repeated, except that each of compositions A5, B15, A and +20 was individually used in place of the formulation used in Example 5. Compositions A5, B15, A and +20 were tested against Xanthomonas sp., using a control, at, for example, concentrations of 1 g/L, 2 g/L and 4 g/L.

[281] Figure 46 shows the test results using composition A5. The control exhibited bacterial growth, while the lack of bacterial growth in Petri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L and 4 g/L of composition A5 showed the antibacterial effect of composition A5.

[282] Figure 47 shows test results using composition B15. The control exhibited bacterial growth, while the lack of bacterial growth in Petri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L and 4 g/L of composition B15 showed the antibacterial effect of composition B 15.

[283] Figures 48(a) to (c) show test results using the +20 composition. The control exhibited bacterial growth, while the lack of bacterial growth in Petri dishes exposed to 14 g/L, 16 g/L and 18 g/L of +20 composition showed the antibacterial effect of +20 composition.

[284] Figure 49 shows the results of the test using composition A. The control exhibited bacterial growth, while the lack of bacterial growth in Petri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L and 4 g/L of the composition A showed the antibacterial effect of composition A.

Example 10

[285] An agriculturally acceptable formulation was created having a composition of a mixture of Premix A (200 grams, 20% by mass), sodium lignosulfonate (40 grams, 4% by mass), naphthalene sulfonate (20 grams, 2% by mass), xanthan gum (5 grams, 0.50% by mass), and diatomaceous earth (735 grams, 73.50% by mass).

[286] The agriculturally acceptable formulation at a concentration of 2,000 g/1,000 L of solution was tested, alongside an untreated control, to which no antibiotics were applied during the test, in an apple orchard that had a history of strong disease pressure (Erwinia amylovora). The orchard contained and was surrounded by conditions favorable to the development of the disease such as: high moisture content in the upper part of the subsoil, adjacent orchards that had the Gala apple variety with high contamination in previous years, and a manifestation of pre- germinating in their own sectors, which led to the decision to plant new trees in the orchard. The cultivar that was tested was an apple tree of the Golden Smoothie variety.

[287] In this test, five applications were made to 220 trees, using 250 liters of water to cover ^ Ha (hectare) with an air-blown sprayer. Trees in the treatment area were sprayed using an air-blown sprayer until water ran down covering 4 rows. Sprays were timed to coincide with the tree's fruit blossoming and petal fall. The test area was sprayed once every 6 to 9 days during the flowering season. Thus, the pre-flowering period was covered as well as the flowering period.

[288] Applications were made on the following days in the following dosages: Table 34

[289] An assessment was made on Day 38, a date by which any infection caused by the disease during the flowering period (flower blight) would be visible.

[290] The experiment was arranged in a paired T-test. Data were analyzed through a T-Test analysis using the statistical package R (R Core Team (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www. R-proiect.org/). As noted previously, an assessment was made 5 days after the last spray. Data on the average number of flowering infections per tree were collected. The data collected from the orchard showed that the effect of the new tannin-based antibacterial formulation was significant (P<0.05). Compared to the untreated control, the new tannin-based antibacterial formulation controlled flower blight infection.

[291] Figures 50(a) and (b) show examples of flower burning that was measured during this test. Table 35 shows the statistics measured in this test. Figure 51 is a graphical representation of the data in Table 35. Table 35

[292] The Shapiro-Wilk normality test value is W=0.91053 with a p-value of 0.3578. The t-value of this data was -5.1178, with a df-value of 6 and a p-value of 0.002183.

[293] This experiment showed that the new tannin-based antibacterial formulation showed an effect in decreasing the number of infected flowering buds compared to the control (which were not exposed to the formulation). This is important because each infected bud (flower burn) is a point of production that is lost during the following 4 years. In other words, the productive wood from which the floral bud, in addition to generating zero production in the year of its infection, loses its productive value, generating compensation costs for fruit wood and latent risks of future infections.

Example 11

[294] In this experiment, a drought infection of pointers (Erwinia amylovora) after flowering was present in a Gala apple variety.

[295] In this particular batch, a hail event occurred, and due to the torn hailstones, an early pointer drought outbreak occurred. Pruning of infected initial shoots occurred in both the treatment and control batches, after which the new tannin-based antibacterial formulation was applied to the treatment batch.

[296] Four applications of the new tannin-based antibacterial formulation were scheduled to cover the season of high relative humidity due to rain. Applications were made on Day 1, Day 6, Day 11, and Day 18; at a dose of 2.0 kg/Ha.

[297] Applications of the new tannin-based antibacterial formulation were made with an air-blown spray machine using 1,000 liters of solution per Ha, covering 9 rows of 47 trees each. In both the treated and control areas, a useful 5-row graph was measured. Assessments were made by counting the number of dry pointers per tree on Day 15 and Day 28.

[298] The formulation that was applied in this Example was the formulation described in Example 10 at a concentration of 2,000 g of formulation per 1,000 liters of water. Trees in the treatment area were sprayed using an air-blown sprayer until water ran off. In this trial, sprays were synchronized every 5 days after petal fall to cover additional bud infections, known as “pointer drought.” The test area was sprayed once every 5 days for three cycles, and once 7 days after the third application. The experiment was arranged in a paired t-test. Data were analyzed through a T-Test analysis using the statistical package R (R Core Team (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www. R-project.org/). A first assessment was made 4 days after the third spraying. Data on the dry number of pointers per row were collected. Data collected from this test in the first evaluation showed that the effect of the invention was significant (P<0.05). Compared to the untreated control, the new tannin-based antibacterial formulation controlled the post-petal fall infection known as pointer drought (see Table 36). Figure 52 is a graphical representation of the data in Table 3. Table 36

[299] The Shapiro-Wilk normality test value was W=0.93245, with a p-value of 0.4724. The average in the treated group was 80.6, while the average in the untreated group was 232.6, thus exemplifying the antibacterial effect of this composition. The t-value of this data was -3.2116, with a df-value of 8 and a p-value of 0.0124.

[300] A second assessment was made 10 days after the fourth spray. Field data were transformed (log[y]) to reduce variance. The data collected from this test in the second evaluation showed that the effect of the new tannin-based antibacterial formulation was significant (P<0.05). Compared to the untreated control, the new tannin-based antibacterial formulation controlled the post-petal drop infection known as pointer drought (see Table 4). Figure 53 is a graphical representation of the data in Table 37.Table 37

[301] The Shapiro-Wilk value of this transformed data was W=0.8547, with a p-value of 0.06605. The average in the treated group was 2.037679, while the average in the untreated group was 2.761950, thereby illustrating the antibacterial effect of this composition. The t-value of this data was -5.2241, with a df of 8 and a p-value of 0.0007986.

[302] Linear prediction maps (Kriging) were made after Day 28 and are shown in Figures 54(a) and (b). Figure 54(a) shows the dry number of pointers in the area treated with the new tannin-based antibacterial formulation. Figure 54(b) shows the control area, which was adjacent to the test area. The images simulate an aerial view of the crop, where with each of the pointer drought values, an interpolation was made between the points (in this Example, apple trees). The scale on the right indicates the colors assigned by number of infected shoots (drought of pointers), the white colors being the indicator of the highest number of infected points in the area.

[303] This Example shows that the use of the new tannin-based antibacterial formulation in growing Gala apple trees at a rate of 2 kg/ha provides a significant improvement against an untreated control in terms of the average number of shoots infected by row (dry pointers).

Example 12

[304] An agriculturally acceptable formulation was created having the composition of Example 10 - a mixture of Premix A (200 grams, 20% by mass), sodium lignosulfonate (40 grams, 4% by mass), naphthalene sulfonate ( 20 grams, 2% by mass), xanthan gum (5 grams, 0.50% by mass), and diatomaceous earth (735 grams, 73.50% by mass). A solution of the agriculturally acceptable formulation in water was created, having a concentration of 7.5 grams of the agriculturally acceptable formulation per liter. 37.5 g of the solution was weighed and added to the agar using the poisoned food technique of Example 1A.

[305] The pathogenic fungus Alternaria sp. was added to the agar and incubated at 28°C for 120 hours. This was repeated on four Petri dishes. After incubation, an assessment was made in which measurements of the diameters of fungal growth on agar containing the agriculturally acceptable formulation were compared with the diameter of four controls that contained the agriculturally acceptable formulation but did not contain the pathogenic fungus. A Percentage of Inhibition was calculated from each sample using the following formula, and the average of the four replicates was taken as the percentage of inhibition for the Example: Percentage of Inhibition = ((Radial growth of control - Radial growth of pathogen) / Radial growth of control)) * 100

[306] Figure 55 shows the test results, and shows that the agriculturally acceptable formulation inhibited the growth of Alternaria sp. Figure 55(a) is the control, and Figure 55(b) is the tested composition. The percentage of inhibition for Alternaria sp. was measured as 1.4%.

Example 13

[307] The conditions of Example 12 were reproduced, with the exception that the pathological fungus was Phytophthora sp. Figure 56 shows the test results, and shows that the agriculturally acceptable formulation inhibited the growth of Phytophthora sp. Figure 56(a) is the control, and Figure 56(b) is the tested composition. The percentage of inhibition for Phytophthora sp. was measured as 100%.

Example 14

[308] The conditions of Example 12 were reproduced, with the exception that the pathological fungus was Colletotrichum sp. Figure 57 shows the test results, and shows that the agriculturally acceptable formulation inhibited the growth of Colletotrichum sp. Figure 57(a) is the control, and Figure 57(b) is the tested composition. The percentage of inhibition for Colletotrichum sp. was measured as 100%.

Example 15A

[309] The conditions of Example 12 were reproduced, with the exception that the pathological fungus was Fusarium sp. Figure 58 shows the test results, and shows that the agriculturally acceptable formulation inhibited the growth of Fusarium sp. Figure 58(a) is the control, and Figure 58(b) is the tested composition. The percentage of inhibition for Fusarium sp. was measured as 69.49%.

Example 15B

[310] The conditions of Example 15A were reproduced, with the exception that the composition tested was a tannin composition extracted from Quebracho tree (genus Schinopsis) (composition “QAMAEA6Q03”). Figure 59 shows the test results, and shows that the agriculturally acceptable formulation inhibited the growth of Fusarium sp. Figure 59(a) is the control, and Figure 59(b) is the tested composition. The percentage of inhibition for Fusarium sp. was measured as 64.89%.

Example 15C

[311] The conditions of Example 15A were reproduced, with the exception that the composition tested was a tannin composition extracted from Acacia tree (Acacia genus) (composition “QAMMSAPA06”). Figure 60 shows the test results, and shows that the agriculturally acceptable formulation inhibited the growth of Fusarium sp. Figure 60(a) is the control, and Figure 60(b) is the tested composition. The percentage of inhibition for Fusarium sp. was measured as 63.78%.

Example 16A

[312] The conditions of Example 12 were reproduced, with the exception that the pathological fungus was Aspergillus sp. Figure 61 shows the test results, and shows that the agriculturally acceptable formulation inhibited the growth of Aspergillus sp. Figure 61 (a) is the control, and Figure 61 (b) is the tested composition. The percentage of inhibition for Aspergillus sp. was measured as 89.76%.

Example 16B

[313] The conditions of Example 16A were reproduced, with the exception that the composition tested was a tannin composition extracted from Quebracho tree (genus Schinopsi) (composition “QAMAEA6Q03”). Figure 62 shows the test results, and shows that the agriculturally acceptable formulation inhibited the growth of Aspergillus sp. Figure 62(a) is the control, and Figure 62(b) is the tested composition. The percentage of inhibition for Aspergillus sp. was measured as 78.92%.

Example 16C

[314] The conditions of Example 16A were reproduced, with the exception that the composition tested was a tannin composition extracted from Acacia tree (genus Acacia) (composition “QAMMSAPA06”). Figure 63 shows the test results, and shows that the agriculturally acceptable formulation inhibited the growth of Aspergillus sp. Figure 63(a) is the control, and Figure 63(b) is the tested composition. The percentage of inhibition for Aspergillus sp. was measured as 68.79%.

Example 17A

[315] The conditions of Example 1A were reproduced, with the exception that a tannin composition extracted from Quebracho tree (genus Schinopsis) (composition “QAMAEA6Q03”) was tested. As can be seen from Figure 64, effective doses of the composition in this test were considered 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Clavibacter sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, Clavibacter sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 17B

[316] The conditions of Example 17A were reproduced, with the exception that a composition comprising 20% QAMAEA6Q3 was tested. As can be seen from Figure 65, effective doses of the composition in this test were considered 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Clavibacter sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, Clavibacter sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 18A

[317] The conditions of Example 1 A were reproduced, with the exception that a tannin composition extracted from Acacia tree (genus Acacia) (composition “QAMMSAPA06”) was tested. As can be seen from Figure 66, effective doses of the composition in this test were considered 0.5 g/L, 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Clavibacter sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 0.5 g/L, 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, Clavibacter sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 18B

[318] The conditions of Example 18A were reproduced, with the exception that a composition comprising 20% QAMMSAPA06 was tested. As can be seen from Figure 67, effective doses of the composition in this test were considered 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Clavibacter sp. . grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, Clavibacter sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 19A

[319] The conditions of Example 2A were reproduced, with the exception that a tannin composition extracted from Quebracho tree (genus Schinopsis) (composition “QAMAEA6Q03”) was tested. As can be seen from Figure 68, effective doses of the composition in this test were considered 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Erwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, Erwinia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 19B

[320] The conditions of Example 19A were reproduced, with the exception that a composition comprising 20% QAMAEA6Q03 was tested. As can be seen from Figure 69, effective doses of the composition in this test were considered 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Erwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, Erwinia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 20 A

[321] The conditions of Example 2A were reproduced, with the exception that a tannin composition extracted from Acacia tree (genus Acacia) (composition “QAMMSAPA06”) was tested. As can be seen from Figure 70, effective doses of the composition in this test were considered 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Erwinia sp. . grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, Erwinia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 20B

[322] The conditions of Example 20A were reproduced, with the exception that a composition comprising 20% QAMMSAPA06 was tested. As can be seen from Figure 71, effective doses of the composition in this test were considered 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Erwinia sp. . grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, Erwinia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 21 A

[323] The conditions of Example 4A were reproduced, with the exception that a tannin composition extracted from Quebracho tree (genus Schinopsis) (composition “QAMAEA6Q03”) was tested. As can be seen from Figure 72, a dose greater than 8 g/L is necessary to treat or prevent Ralstonia sp.

Example 2 IB

[324] The conditions of Example 21 A were reproduced, with the exception that a composition comprising 20% QAMAEA6Q03 was tested. As can be seen from Figure 73, a dose greater than 8 g/L is necessary to treat or prevent Ralstonia sp.

Example 22A

[325] The conditions of Example 4A were reproduced, with the exception that a tannin composition extracted from Acacia tree (genus Acacia) (composition “QAMMSAPA06”) was tested. As can be seen from Figure 74, effective doses of the composition in this test were considered 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Ralstonia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, Ralstonia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 22B

[326] The conditions of Example 22A were reproduced, with the exception that a composition comprising 20% QAMMSAPA06 was tested. As can be seen from Figure 75, effective doses of the composition in this test were considered 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Ralstonia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, Ralstonia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 22A

[327] The conditions of Example 5A were reproduced, with the exception that a tannin composition extracted from Quebracho tree (genus Schinopsis) (composition “QAMAEA6Q03”) was tested. As can be seen from Figure 76, effective doses of the composition in this test were considered 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Xanthomonas sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 2 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, Xanthomonas sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 22B

[328] The conditions of Example 22 A were reproduced, with the exception that a composition comprising 20% QAMAEA6Q03 was tested. As can be seen from Figure 77, effective doses of the composition in this test were considered 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Xanthomonas sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, Xanthomonas sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 23 A

[329] The conditions of Example 5A were reproduced, with the exception that a tannin composition extracted from Acacia tree (genus Acacia) (composition “QAMMSAPA06”) was tested. As can be seen from Figure 78, effective doses of the composition in this test were considered 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Xanthomonas sp. . grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, Xanthomonas sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 23 B

[330] The conditions of Example 23A were reproduced, with the exception that a composition comprising 20% QAMMSAPA06 was tested. As can be seen from Figure 79, effective doses of the composition in this test were considered 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which Hast Xanthomonas sp. . grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 8 g/L, Xanthomonas sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 24A

[331] The conditions of Example 5A were reproduced, with the exception that a synthetic tannin composition (“TALSWW”; containing 3% tannins) was tested. As can be seen from Figures 80 and 81, effective doses of the composition in this test were considered 41 ml/L, 51 ml/L and 61 ml/L, which were the concentrations at which Xanthomonas sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 41 ml/L, 51 ml/L and 61 ml/L, Xanthomonas sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 24B

[332] The conditions of Example 24A were reproduced, with the exception that a different synthetic tannin composition (“TALSFWW”; containing 3% tannins) was tested. As can be seen from Figures 82 and 83, effective doses of the composition in this test were considered 46 ml/L, 56 ml/L and 66 ml/L, which were the concentrations at which Xanthomonas sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 46 ml/L, 56 ml/L and 66 ml/L, Xanthomonas sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 25A

[333] The conditions of Example 2A were reproduced, with the exception that a synthetic tannin composition (“TALSRA”; containing 3% tannins) was tested. As can be seen from Figures 84 and 85, effective doses of the composition in this test were considered 11 ml/L, 21 ml/L, 31 ml/L, 41 ml/L, 51 ml/L and 61 ml/L, which were the concentrations at which Erwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 11 ml/L, 21 ml/L, 31 ml/L, 41 ml/L, 51 ml/L and 61 ml/L, Erwinia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 25 B

[334] The conditions of Example 25A were reproduced, with the exception that a different synthetic tannin composition (“TALSFWW”; containing 3% tannins) was tested. As can be seen from Figures 86 and 87, effective doses of the composition in this test were considered 16 ml/L, 26 ml/L, 36 ml/L, 46 ml/L, 56 ml/L and 66 ml/L, which were the concentrations at which Erwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. At concentrations of 16 ml/L, 26 ml/L, 36 ml/L, 46 ml/L, 56 ml/L and 66 ml/L, Erwinia sp. it was not visibly present, and consequently did not grow on the agar.

Example 26A

[335] The conditions of Example 4A were reproduced, with the exception that a synthetic tannin composition (“TALSRA”; containing 3% tannins) was tested. As can be seen from Figures 88 and 89, none of the doses tested were considered effective doses of the composition, as Ralstonia sp. grew at a rate comparable to the control.

Example 26B

[336] The conditions of Example 26A were reproduced, with the exception that a different synthetic tannin composition (“TALSFWW”; containing 3% tannins) was tested. As can be seen from Figures 90 and 91, none of the doses tested were considered effective doses of the composition, as Ralstonia sp. grew at a rate comparable to the control.

Example 27A

[337] The conditions of Example 1 A were reproduced, with the exception that a synthetic tannin composition (“TALSRA”; containing 3% tannins) was tested. As can be seen from Figure 92, none of the doses tested were considered effective doses of the composition, as Clavibacter sp. grew at a rate comparable to the control.

Example 27B

[338] The conditions of Example 27A were reproduced, with the exception that a different synthetic tannin composition (“TALSFWW”; containing 3% tannins) was tested. As can be seen from Figure 93, none of the doses tested were considered effective doses of the composition, as Clavibacter sp. grew at a rate comparable to the control.

[339] Although the inventive concept has been described relative to what are currently considered practical exemplary embodiments, it should be understood that the inventive concept here is not limited to the described embodiments, and covers various modifications and equivalent arrangements included in the spirit and scope of the claims. attached.

Claims (14)

1. Method for preventing or treating a disease in plants, characterized by the fact that the disease is caused by bacteria or a fungus, wherein the method comprises administering a composition to a plant in need thereof, wherein the composition is for administration for plants and comprises tannins, water and one or more inert components selected from the list consisting of celite, diatomaceous earth, bentonite, pyrophyllite, kaolin, montmorillonite, thenardite, attapulgite, dolomite, clay, cork, humic acids, and fulvic acids. 2. Method according to claim 1, characterized in that the composition additionally comprises at least one item selected from the group consisting of dispersants, surfactants and/or humectants, thickeners, bactericides, resistance inducers, biopesticides, fungicides, fertilizers of foliage, and hormones. 3. Method according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that the composition comprises a tannin, carbohydrates and bentonite. 4. Method according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that the composition additionally comprises diatomaceous earth. 5. Method according to claim 4, characterized in that the composition additionally comprises sodium lignosulfate, naphthalene sulfonate, and xanthan gum. 6. Method according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that the tannin is selected from the group consisting of ellagic, pyrogallols or gallic tannins. 7. Method according to claim 6, characterized in that the tannin is selected from the group consisting of castalagin and vescalagin. 8. Method according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that the tannin is a pseudotannin. 9. Method according to any one of claims 1 to 8, characterized in that the disease is caused by bacteria selected from the group consisting of Clavibacter sp., Erwinia sp., Pseudomonas sp., Ralstonia sp., and Xanthomonas sp. ., or disease is caused by a fungus selected from the group consisting of Alternaria sp., Phytophthora sp., Colletotrichum sp., Fusarium sp., and Aspergillus sp. 10. Method according to any one of claims 1 to 9, characterized in that the composition is administered to at least one of the foliage, stem, crown, trunk, roots, shoots, branches, or flowers of the plant, or is administered to at least one of the seeds or rhizomes of the plant. 11. Method according to any one of claims 1 to 10, characterized in that the composition is administered to the plant at least twice at an interval of 1 to 21 days. 12. Method according to any one of claims 1 to 11, characterized in that the composition is administered during the seedling stage, transplant stage, vegetative stage, pre-flowering stage, full flowering stage, post-flowering stage -flowering, fruiting stage, or dormancy of the plant. 13. Method according to any one of claims 1 to 12, characterized in that the plant is a vegetable plant, a cereal plant, a fruit plant, a nut plant, or sugar cane, e.g. that the plant is a fruit tree. 14. Use of the composition as defined in any one of claims 1 to 8, characterized by the fact that it is to prevent or treat a disease in a plant, wherein the disease is caused by bacteria or fungus.