Agrochemical Nanoformulations Patents: Leaders & White Space 2026
- 79.3% of all 29 records sit with the top five assignees, leaving a long tail of single- or double-filing entrants.
- Peak filing year was 2021 at 9 records, with 2021→2024 down 22% — a span the data treats as complete, unlike the still-filling years after it.
- A01N and A01P dominate class coverage at 89.7% and 69.0% of records respectively, while nanotechnology-specific B82Y sits at just 20.7%.
Filing growth compares 2021 (9 records) with 2024 (7) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 29 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
Agrochemical nanoformulation patents span a narrow but technically dense corner of crop protection: nanoemulsion droplets, nanocarrier loading, controlled release, leaf adhesion, environmental fate and regulatory classification. This scope pulls in 29 published records filed or published between 2015 and the 2026 data cut-off, drawn from receiving offices that include Europe, India, Israel, the United States, WIPO/PCT filings and Canada. The dataset is small enough that individual filings move the picture, and family-level counting is used throughout so that continuations and multi-jurisdiction copies of the same invention are not double-counted.
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent one or two years in any trend chart will always look thinner than they eventually turn out to be — that is a lag in the data, not a real drop in filing activity.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 29 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim language.
Filing activity, 2017–2026
Filing peaked at 9 records in 2021. The 2021-to-2024 span, the last window the data treats as complete, is down 22% to 7 records — a real pullback from peak, though not evidence of a field in decline given how thin the still-filling 2025-2026 window remains.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
A01N (biocides/agrochemicals) and A01P (pesticide activity) anchor the field at 89.7% and 69.0% of the 29 records respectively. Delivery-adjacent classes — A23L, B01D and C05C — each sit at 31.0%, while the nanotechnology-specific B82Y class covers only 20.7% of records, meaning most filings claim the agrochemical function first and the nano-delivery mechanism as a secondary element.
Shares are the percentage of the 29 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Agrochemical Nanoformulations with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about agrochemical nanoformulations and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative and most-cited filings
Alcohol ether compound and use thereof in water-based nanopesticide preparation (US20250255296A1)
An alcohol ether compound and use thereof in a water-based nanopesticide preparation are provided. The alcohol ether compound has a structure shown in Formula 1. The alcohol ether compound is used as a specific surfactant of emamectin benzoate, and a stable and transparent water-based nano-preparation for the emamectin benzoate could be obtained in water at room temperature.Filed by the Institute of Environment and Sustainable Development in Agriculture, CAAS; published 2025-08-14.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2022036010A1 | Green closed loop bio-waste refining process for producing smart active extracts and delivery systems for the… | 9 |
| 2 | WO2020154739A1 | Methods of delivering plant virus-based nanopesticides | 5 |
Citation counts inside a small, recent-heavy corpus like this one favour older filings and should be read as a signal of influence, not of current commercial weight.
Publication numbers are shown where the record carries one (2 of 2 rows); clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →What the data means for freedom-to-operate
Three read-throughs from the filing pattern, technology split and citation record.
Claim density sits with a small group
With the top five assignees holding 79.3% of all 29 records in scope and the top ten holding 96.6%, most of the technical ground in this dataset has already been staked out by a handful of filers. New entrants are effectively working around a small number of established claim sets rather than an open field.
Peak has passed, not the field
Filing peaked at 9 records in 2021 and had fallen to 7 by 2024, a 22% decline over that span. Because 2025 and 2026 are still filling in under the usual 18-month publication lag, this should be read as a cooling from a peak rather than a verdict on the technology's future.
Function claims outnumber mechanism claims
A01N and A01P — the agrochemical-function classes — cover 89.7% and 69.0% of records, while B82Y, the class specific to nanotechnology applications, covers only 20.7%. Most filers are protecting the pesticidal or biocidal use first and treating the nanocarrier as a supporting element rather than the headline invention.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to agrochemical nanoformulations, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gaps sit
The ranked leaders in this dataset cover 13 companies; the leader holds 11 records against a fifth-place count of 1 and a tenth-place count of 1 — a steep drop-off rather than a gradual one.
One filer well ahead of the field
The leading assignee holds 11 of the 29 records in scope, well clear of a fifth-place holder at 1 record. That gap suggests one organisation has built a genuine filing programme around nanoformulation delivery while most others in the ranking are testing single ideas.
Most entrants file once
Both the fifth- and tenth-ranked assignees hold just 1 record each, and academic institutions make up much of that tail. This is a field where a single well-drafted filing can still stand out, precisely because so few organisations have filed more than once.
No assignee shows fresh-year activity yet
Every assignee tracked for recent-year momentum, including the two largest filers, shows zero records in the latest year, with some down 100% year over year. Given the 18-month publication lag, this reads as a reporting gap rather than an exit from the space.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Cellacure LLC | 0 | — |
| The Regents of the University of California | 0 | — |
| Institute of Environment and Sustainable Development in Agriculture, CAAS | 0 | — |
| Case Western Reserve University | 0 | — |
| Texas A&M University | 0 | -100% |
| Hefei University of Technology | 0 | -100% |
| YUVRAJ VIJAY PATIL | 0 | -100% |
| REGISTRAR MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIV ROHTAK | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The dataset points to a concentrated but still-open field. These are reasonable next steps for a team deciding where to file or partner.
Map the leader's full claim set
With one assignee holding 11 of 29 records, a claim-by-claim read of that portfolio is the fastest way to see which delivery mechanisms are already fenced off and which are described but not tightly claimed.
Run a claims comparison in EurekaWatch the 2025-2026 window as it fills in
The apparent slowdown after 2021 is partly a publication-lag artefact. Re-checking filing counts for 2025 and 2026 every few months will show whether the 2021-2024 pullback continues or reverses.
Set up a monitoring alert in EurekaTest the under-claimed branches directly
Leaf adhesion, environmental fate testing and regulatory classification pathways all sit well below the core biocide classes in record count. A targeted prior-art search on each would confirm how much room is actually open.
Search white space in EurekaCommon questions on agrochemical nanoformulation patents
It is highly concentrated at the top: the five leading assignees together hold 79.3% of the 29 records in scope, and the top ten reach 96.6%. The ranking itself covers 13 companies, so most of the remaining organisations hold only one or two records each. For a new entrant, this means the practical question is less 'is the field crowded' and more 'which of the five leaders' claim sets does my approach actually sit next to'.
Filing peaked at 9 records in 2021 and had fallen to 7 by 2024, a 22% decline over that span, which is the most recent period the data treats as complete. Years after 2024 look thinner in any chart because publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, so those figures will keep rising as more records publish. Read the 2021-2024 dip as a real cooling from a peak, not as proof the technology is being abandoned.
A01N, covering biocides and agrochemicals generally, appears in 89.7% of the 29 records, and A01P, covering pesticide activity, appears in 69.0%. Delivery- and processing-adjacent classes such as A23L, B01D and C05C each sit at 31.0%, while B82Y, the class specific to nanotechnology applications, covers only 20.7% of records. That gap between the agrochemical-function classes and the nanotechnology-specific class suggests most filers are claiming the pesticidal use first and treating the nano-delivery mechanism as a secondary or dependent element.
US20250255296A1, filed by the Institute of Environment and Sustainable Development in Agriculture, CAAS and published 2025-08-14, claims an alcohol ether compound used as a specific surfactant for emamectin benzoate, producing a stable, transparent water-based nano-preparation formed at room temperature. The claim scope is centred on that surfactant chemistry and the resulting formulation stability, not on nanocarrier delivery mechanisms generally. Anyone formulating emamectin benzoate or a structurally similar active with a comparable alcohol ether surfactant should read the full claim set before assuming a workaround.
The technology composition data shows nanotechnology-specific claims (B82Y at 20.7% of records) are thin relative to the core agrochemical-function classes, and receiving-office coverage in Canada sits at just 1 record against 5-6 in the other major offices. Leaf adhesion, environmental fate testing and regulatory classification pathways are named in the search scope but do not show up as a dominant class, suggesting they are described in specifications more often than they are claimed tightly. A prior-art search focused on those specific mechanisms, rather than on the broad biocide function, is the fastest way to confirm how open they really are.
Research Agrochemical Nanoformulations in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole agrochemical nanoformulations corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company’s registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.