Biological Seed Treatment Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Concentrated at the top. the leading assignee holds 22 of 70 records, and the top five combined account for 78.6% of the field.
- Strain-plus-formulation claims dominate. A01N biocide claims and C12N microorganism claims each appear in over 70% of records, usually in the same family.
- Delivery hardware is barely claimed. A01C planting and sowing claims sit at just 8.6% of records, leaving the application-mechanics layer comparatively open.
Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 70 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
A field built on strain claims wrapped in formulation claims
Biological seed treatments and inoculants sit at the intersection of microbiology and agrochemical formulation: a microbial strain has to survive coating, storage and planting, then colonise the root and compete with native soil organisms once in the ground. The patent record in scope — 70 published records spanning 2015 through the 2026 cut-off — shows claims concentrated where those two problems meet, with biocide/formulation claims (A01N) and microorganism claims (C12N) each covering more than seven in ten records.
Filing is held tightly by a small group: the leading assignee accounts for 22 of the 70 records, and the top five together hold 78.6% of the field. The technology composition points to where that filing pressure has gone — heavily into strain and formulation claims, much less into the equipment and delivery mechanics that get the inoculant onto the seed.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
How the filing footprint breaks down
Seventy published records make up the tracked field, spread across eight IPC subclasses and six receiving offices. The composition below shows where claim density sits and where it thins out.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings peaked in 2018 at 23 records and the most recent years show far fewer publications — expected, since publication typically lags filing by roughly 18 months and the 2026 count is a partial year. Treat the last two years of the trend line as undercounted rather than as a real slowdown.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
Biocide/agrochemical claims (A01N) and microorganism claims (C12N) dominate, each appearing in over 70% of the 70 records — meaning most filings combine a formulation claim with a microbial claim in the same family. Records can carry multiple IPC codes, so subclass shares add up to well over 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 70 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Biological Seed Treatments and Inoculants with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about biological seed treatments and inoculants and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative filing and the most-cited records
Endophytic microbial seed treatment formulations and methods related thereto for improved plant performance
This invention describes discovery and development of a biological system of plant growth promotion and environmental improvement by carbon sequestration and/or nitrogen utilization by application of a microbial agent, e.g., a highly effective strain of T. viride, particularly strains NRRL B-50520 and/or K5. This strain outperforms the best current strains of Trichoderma used for this purpose available commercially. The invention also describes and demonstrates that strain combinations including Bacillus amyloliquefaciens further improve plant productivity and product quality.US20190174692A1 · filed by Agrauxine Corp. · published 2019-06-13
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2003057861A2 | Sulfur-oxidizing plant growth promoting rhizobacteria for enhanced canola performance | 119 |
| 2 | US20080242543A1 | Sulfur-oxidizing plant growth promoting rhizobacteria for enhanced canola performance | 34 |
| 3 | US20030172588A1 | Sulfur-oxidizing plant growth promoting rhizobacteria for enhanced canola performance | 20 |
| 4 | US20190174692A1 | Endophytic microbial seed treatment formulations and methods related thereto for improved plant performance | 15 |
| 5 | WO2018208722A1 | Plant growth-promoting microbes, compositions, and uses | 11 |
| 6 | US20200138038A1 | Plant growth-promoting microbes, compositions, and uses | 10 |
| 7 | US20080213225A1 | Sulfur-oxidizing plant growth promoting rhizobacteria for enhanced canola performance | 10 |
| 8 | WO2019084324A1 | Endophytic microbial seed treatment formulations and methods related thereto for improved plant performance | 9 |
| 9 | EP1465980B1 | Sulfur-oxidizing bacteria for promoting plant growth | 9 |
| 10 | WO2018183381A1 | Methods and agricultural compositions for preventing or controlling plant diseases | 8 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and skew toward older filings; they are a signal of prior influence, not of current commercial importance.
Each row carries its publication number; 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 filing data signals
Three patterns stand out once the records are grouped by assignee, technology class and citation weight — each has a direct bearing on where a new filing would land.
A small group controls most of the claim space
The leading assignee alone holds 22 of the 70 records in scope. Combined, the top five hold 78.6% and the top ten reach 97.1%, leaving only a handful of records outside the ranked leaders.
Formulation and microbial claims travel together
A01N (biocide/agrochemical) and C12N (microorganisms) each cover more than seven in ten of the 70 records, and frequently the same family carries both — the core commercial pattern is a strain claim wrapped in a formulation claim.
Older rhizobacteria work still anchors later filings
The most-cited record in the set, on sulfur-oxidizing rhizobacteria for canola, has drawn 119 citations — a sign that early formulation approaches in this space continue to shape how later filings are framed, even as filing volume has shifted toward newer microbial claims.
Application hardware is the thin part of the field
Planting and sowing equipment claims cover only 8.6% of the 70 records, far below the microbial and formulation classes — the mechanics of getting the inoculant into the ground has drawn comparatively little patent attention.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to biological seed treatments and inoculants, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the field is still open
Fifteen assignees make up the ranked field, with holdings falling off sharply after the top few. That leaves both a clear leadership group and clearly under-claimed technical branches for anyone filing new claims.
A single assignee anchors the field
The top-ranked assignee holds 22 of the 70 records in scope — nearly a third of the entire tracked field on its own, well ahead of the next four combined.
Holdings drop off fast past the top five
By the tenth-ranked assignee, holdings are down to 2 records, and the top ten together already cover 97.1% of the 70 records — the remaining ranked assignees hold single-digit counts.
Filing is mostly solo, not joint
Only three co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset, and the strongest of them is a repeated internal pairing rather than a cross-company collaboration — little evidence of joint filing between formulation and delivery specialists.
Recent-year counts read low across the board
Every tracked leading assignee shows zero filings in the latest year on record — consistent with publication lag rather than an actual stop in filing activity, since the most recent one to two years are always undercounted.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| YESMIN LAILA | 0 | — |
| BANERJEE MANAS RANJAN | 0 | — |
| Tenfold Technologies LLC (doing business as AgriSync Science) | 0 | — |
| BRETTYOUNG SEEDS | 0 | — |
| ADVANCED BIOLOGICAL MARKETING INC | 0 | — |
| Bayer CropScience LP | 0 | — |
| Taxon Biosciences Inc | 0 | — |
| Lallemand Inc | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a field with entrenched strain-and-formulation claims at the top and open ground in delivery mechanics. Turning that into a filing or freedom-to-operate decision means going deeper on specific claims and specific holders.
Check freedom to operate against the cited families
The most-cited records, including the sulfur-oxidizing rhizobacteria family and the endophytic Trichoderma/Bacillus family, carry the claim language most likely to overlap a new formulation.
Run a claim comparison in EurekaScope a claim around delivery mechanics
A01C planting and sowing claims cover only 8.6% of the 70 records, leaving room for a claim built around metering or timing rather than strain identity.
Draft a claim in EurekaTrack the leading assignees' next filings
With the top five holding 78.6% of the field, their next moves will shape where claim density goes next, even though recent-year counts currently read low due to publication lag.
Set up assignee monitoring in EurekaFrequently asked questions
Filing in this dataset is concentrated at the top: the leading assignee holds 22 of the 70 records in scope, and the top five combined account for 78.6% of all records. That leaves a long tail — by the tenth-ranked assignee, holdings drop to just 2 records. For a company assessing freedom to operate, this means clearing the top few holders addresses most of the crowded claim space, but the remaining ~2.9% outside the top ten is spread thin enough that a full clearance search still matters for edge cases.
Biocide and agrochemical formulation claims (IPC A01N) appear in 84.3% of the 70 records, and microorganism/genetic-engineering claims (C12N) appear in 74.3% — together these form the dense core of the field, since most inoculant patents claim both a formulation and a microbial component in the same family. Organic and waste-derived fertiliser carrier claims (C05F) follow at 60.0%. Planting and sowing equipment claims (A01C) are comparatively rare at 8.6%, marking the application-hardware side as the thinnest-claimed branch.
The filing trend peaked in 2018 at 23 records, and the years since show fewer published filings — but that decline should not be read as the field cooling off. Patent publication lags actual filing by roughly 18 months, so the most recent one to two years in any trend line are structurally undercounted, and there are too few complete recent years in this dataset to state a reliable growth rate. A better read is that the field's public record is still catching up to filings made in the last two years.
US20190174692A1, assigned to Agrauxine Corp. and published 2019-06-13, claims endophytic microbial seed treatment formulations built around specific Trichoderma viride strains (NRRL B-50520 and K5) combined with Bacillus amyloliquefaciens, aimed at nitrogen utilisation and carbon sequestration benefits. It has drawn 15 citations from later filings, indicating real influence on subsequent formulation work. It blocks use of those specific named strains and their claimed combination, not endophytic seed treatment generally, so a formulation built on a different strain deposit and a different targeted agronomic benefit is the standard way to sit outside its claims.
The crowded ground is strain-plus-formulation claims under A01N and C12N, held mostly by a small number of assignees who together account for 78.6% of the 70 records in scope. The comparatively open ground is application hardware and delivery mechanics — A01C planting and sowing claims sit at only 8.6% of records — and the interface between formulation and delivery, where only three co-assignee pairs appear across the whole dataset, suggesting little collaborative filing has happened there yet. A claim built around delivery-mechanism specificity rather than strain identity is more likely to clear the existing art.
Research Biological Seed Treatments and Inoculants in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole biological seed treatments and inoculants 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.