R&D Leaders from Bayer, Corteva, Rovensa, and More Share Breakthroughs in Formulation Science (Part 1)
12 de junho de 2025 If you are looking for the latest updates on new formulations and R&D, the Agronegócio Global Live! New Formulations webinar showcases a great discussion covering new formulations entering the marketplace for crop protection, biologicals, and adjuvants/inerts.
Agronegócio Global asks Shaun Selness, Head of Analytical Sciences, Small Molecules for Ciência de culturas da Bayer; Ashish Batra, Vice President, Crop Health R&D for Corteva; Sara Monteiro, Head of Global R&D Biocontrol and Adjuvants for Rovensa Próximo; Joshua Colmer, Founder and CEO for TraitSeq; e Lesley A. Schmid, Global Account Manager, Agro for Evonik questions from the webinar’s audience.
ABG: Is there any possibility and study for the mixture of biologicals and active ingredients (AI), where AIs don’t harm the biological but effective on the target pests?
Shaun Selness
Shaun Selness (SS): We co-formulate and combine synthetic and biological molecules when it makes sense, and several of these products are available to farmers today. Launched last year, Acceleron N-314 Seed Treatment provides nematode protection and promotes root volume in corn by combining fluopyram and Votivo, the latter containing live bacteria that colonize root systems and provide a biological barrier to help protect against parasitic nematodes.
In soybean, Acceleron Standard includes bio-enhancers that protect against nutrient and moisture stress, while the synthetic components of the seed treatment defend against threats like nematodes, insects and diseases.
Lesley Schmid
Lesley Schmid (LS): Evonik is starting this to evaluate the combination of selected conventional and biological active ingredients this year in a field trial. In our laboratory testing, we have seen that some fungal biological actives survive in our water-free formulation even with chemical fungicides.
There are already hints from greenhouse trials and a field trial that combining active ingredients can give synergistic effects, and it may be possible to reduce the treat rate of the chemical active. However, there are many Ais and testing all would not be practical.
ABG: What is the current status of artificial intelligence (AI) in formulation design?
Joshua Colmer
Joshua Colmer (JC): AI holds great promise in formulation design, but its impact will ultimately depend on access to large, well-structured, and high-quality datasets. If physical-chemical properties of active ingredients, adjuvants, and solvents can be reliably encoded into a structured tabular format, then classical machine learning methods like gradient boosting machines could be very effective at predicting key formulation properties including uptake and compatibility.
These models could then be further enhanced by incorporating insights from large language models (LLMs) trained on relevant scientific literature. This hybrid approach combines precise numerical prediction from structured physical-chemical property data with contextual understanding drawn from published research. Together, these systems could provide tailored recommendations for formulation types and adjuvant combinations based on the biological and chemical context of the target crop, weed, or pest.
ABG: How does TraitSeq train models to make better recommendations than traditional methods?
JC: At TraitSeq, we train AI models on multi-environment gene expression datasets that are directly linked to phenotypic outcomes. This enables us to identify the molecular signatures that underlie complex traits like nitrogen use efficiency (NUE), yield, or stress resilience.
Unlike conventional phenotyping, which relies on visible or measurable traits often assessed late in development, our models detect early-stage gene expression patterns that are predictive of enhanced performance. For example, a nitrogen trial is costly, time-intensive, and influenced by environmental variability. TraitSeq’s models can identify gene expression markers associated with enhanced NUE from a single leaf tissue sample taken from the plant. This approach is also capable of identifying markers to capture underlying biological processes that are invisible to phenotyping, such as modulation of cell metabolism or improved transport of sugars and nutrients.
This allows companies to screen candidates more efficiently and with greater confidence, selecting those most likely to succeed before committing to expensive trials. Our models not only predict which candidates will perform well, they also explain why – offering a powerful combination of predictive accuracy and biological insight.
TraitSeq offers a step-change in precision, speed, and biological insight compared to phenotype-only approaches.
ABG: What insights can you provide into designing formulation to combat drift plus volatility?
LS: Drift and volatility can be impacted by viscosity of the formulation and particle size of the droplets. Adjuvants can be used to influence both criteria. Adjuvants can also aid with adhesion and slow the evaporation rate.
Sara Monteiro
Sara Monteiro (SM): Designing formulations to combat drift and volatility requires a multifaceted approach that integrates chemistry, formulation science, and application technology.
If the active ingredient has high vapor pressure, meaning that it is easy to volatilize, controlled release strategies should be selected. For example, microencapsulation will help with the reduction of the volatilization but will not be of a great help for drift reduction. The best situation that will contribute to reduce both problems are formulations in gel or inverted emulsions.
In addition, functional co-formulants specifically targeting the suppression of volatilization, like inhibitors and for drift reduction, like polymers or invert emulsifiers to create large, heavy droplets should be used. Finally, the selection of the proper application technologies should be also considered. For example, the use of low drift nozzles is strongly recommended.
ABG: What is your take on encapsulation strategies for formulation? Does it make things difficult with registration processes?
LS: We currently do not offer products for encapsulation. In our limited experience and particularly in Europe, it is extremely important to consider microplastic free encapsulations for registration purposes.
SM: Indeed, encapsulation strategies in agrochemical formulations offer significant benefits but also introduce complexities, especially in the regulatory registration process.
Encapsulation (especially micro- and nano-encapsulation) significantly reduces vapor loss of volatile actives and enables sustained delivery of active ingredients, reducing the need for frequent applications and minimizing environmental impact. However, the type of system used, like synthetic polymers may persist in the environment. The EU and other regions are moving toward banning microplastics, which directly impacts capsule suspension (CS) and seed treatment formulations. So, the selection of bio-based polymers is key to addressing these concerns. In addition, encapsulation also brings another level of complexity in products characterization, which can lead to longer approval times or additional data requirements.
Encapsulation offers clear advantages in agricultural formulations, but it does complicate the registration process. Companies must invest in robust characterization, safety testing, and stay ahead of regulatory trends, especially around environmental sustainability.
ABG: Is there any thought to alternate application methodologies to co-apply microbes and traditional chemistries, like a planter box?
LS: The ability to combine chemical and biological active ingredients depends heavily on the physical stability of both products and how sensitive the microbe viability is. Some products can be applied together with no impact on performance. If a microbe is very sensitive, alternate methodologies may be required but will be specific to the type of organism and formulation type. Tank mix compatibility must always be tested on a case-by-case basis.
SM: There is growing interest in alternative application methodologies—including planter box treatments—for co-applying microbial products and traditional agrochemicals. This approach is gaining traction due to its potential to improve efficacy by synergistic effects, reduce environmental impact, and simplify logistics for farmers.
In terms of application methods, the plant box treatments are a good example, where both microbes and chemicals are directly applied in the seed furrow or seed trench during planting. This method ensures close proximity to the root zone, enhancing microbial colonization and nutrient availability. Other potential methods are seeds coating and by drip irrigation systems, delivering microbes and soluble fertilizers through irrigation lines.
The encapsulation of microbes is being used to protect microbes during co-application with fertilizers or pesticides.
ABG: How do you reduce the water activity in liquid biological formulations?
LS: Through multiple hydrogen bonds we can coordinate up to 1-2 % of water with our BREAK-THRU BP products.
SM: Reducing water activity in liquid biological formulations is crucial for enhancing shelf life and microbial stability. Some strategies include the use of humectants that will lower the water activity without removing water content entirely. Common examples include glycerol or sugars (e.g., trehalose, sucrose), often used in microbial formulations to stabilize cells during storage. The addition of salts like sodium chloride or potassium chloride can reduce water activity by creating osmotic pressure. Other technologies like encapsulation in oil-based carriers or emulsions can also reduce the effective water activity.
However, one of the best strategies is to use oil-based or emulsion systems, replacing water with oil-based carriers (e.g., mineral oil, vegetable oil) or using water-in-oil emulsions can significantly reduce water activity while maintaining flowability.
ABG: Please confirm how to preserve microbial spores intact in liquid/powder formulation for a shelf life of two years?
LS: We have seen the best success with limiting the water activity of the formulation.
SM: To preserve microbial spores in liquid or powder formulations for a shelf life of up to two years, several strategies must be carefully implemented, depending on the formulation type and the microbial species involved.
Powder formulations are generally more stable and preferred for long-term storage. In this case, key strategies are linked to water activity control, that should be <0.2 to inhibit microbial degradation and enzymatic activity by using desiccants or moisture-barrier packaging to maintain low aw. The use of protectants and inert carriers like kaolin, or lignite is very important to ensure distribution and stability.
Liquid formulations are more challenging due to higher water activity, but can be stabilized with the right techniques, such as the use of low water activity carrier fluids, for example replace water with low-water activity solvents like glycerol, propylene glycol, or polyethylene glycol, use osmoprotectants and preservatives that do not harm the spores but prevent contamination and/or use technologies like encapsulation in oil-based emulsions or biodegradable polymers to isolate them from water and oxygen.
Receba a Newsletter hoje mesmo!
