Contaminant Control Botanical Materials Patents: Leaders & Gaps 2026
- A single Chinese testing-institute pairing anchors the field: the strongest co-assignee link accounts for 8 shared filings, more than any other collaboration in the dataset.
- Filing has not slowed at scale: the three-year span from 2021 to 2024 shows filings up 14%, from 7 to 8 records.
- Material analysis dominates the claim space: G01N accounts for 85.9% of all 92 records, leaving cleaning, biocide-activity and food-composition classes each under 8%.
Filing growth compares 2021 (7 records) with 2024 (8) — 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 92 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks patent families concerned with detecting and controlling contaminants in botanical raw materials — pesticide residues, heavy metals, aflatoxins, and the sample preparation and species-authentication methods that support those tests. The scope spans 92 published records filed between 2015 and 2026, drawn from a search combining botanical contaminant testing and pesticide residue terminology against detection-method and sample-preparation classifiers.
Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the 2025 and 2026 figures in any trend chart understate real filing activity for those years; treat the most recent complete year, 2024, as the reliable endpoint for growth comparisons.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology mix
Two views of the same 92 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and how those records distribute across IPC subclasses when a single record can carry more than one classification.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings peaked at 12 in 2018, the high point so far in this dataset. Activity in the 2021-2024 window rose 14%, from 7 to 8 records; 2025 and 2026 figures are still filling in as publications catch up with filing dates.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
G01N (material analysis and testing) covers 85.9% of the 92 records in scope, confirming that most inventive effort sits in detection methodology rather than in adjacent classes like biocide formulation (A01N, 6.5%), pesticide activity (A01P, 5.4%) or cleaning processes (B08B, 4.3%). Shares sum past 100% because records commonly carry multiple classes.
Shares are the percentage of the 92 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Contaminant Control in Botanical Raw Materials with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about contaminant control in botanical raw materials and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative filing and most-cited records
Pesticide residue detection data platform (US11256723B2)
Disclosed is a pesticide residue detection data platform based on high resolution mass spectrum, the Internet and data science, and a method for automatically generating a detection report. The platform includes allied laboratories, a detection result database of the allied laboratories, four basic sub-databases, a data collection system and an intelligent data analysis system. The intelligent analysis system reads data according to conditions set by a user, performs various statistical analyses according to a statistical analysis model, generates charts, obtains a comprehensive conclusion, and returns an analysis result to the client ends of the allied laboratories.Filed by Chinese Academy of Inspection and Quarantine, granted 2022-02-22.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CN105866272A | 一种保健品中农药残留的检测方法 | 26 |
| 2 | US20210223219A1 | Electronic id database and detection method for pesticide compound in edible agro-products based on LC-q-orbi… | 25 |
| 3 | CN102128877A | 现场定性定量快速检测农药残留物的装置 | 18 |
| 4 | US20170284984A1 | Method and system for detecting pesticide residue in argicultural products using mass spectrometry imaging an… | 17 |
| 5 | CN101782481A | 含联苯菊酯残留的茶叶实物标样自然基体阳性材料获取方法 | 17 |
| 6 | CN109374573A | 基于近红外光谱分析的黄瓜表皮农药残留识别方法 | 16 |
| 7 | US20200311099A1 | Method of online tracing pesticide residues and visualizing warning on basis of high resolution mass spectrum… | 15 |
| 8 | US20200042540A1 | Pesticide residue detection data platform based on high resolution mass spectrum, internet and data science, … | 11 |
| 9 | CN202837192U | 一种便携式农药残留检测装置 | 11 |
| 10 | CN204044070U | 农药残留量检测装置 | 9 |
Citation counts favour older filings in any searched corpus; read them as a signal of influence within this dataset, not as a measure of which technology matters most today.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. 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 data means for a filing decision
Three patterns stand out once the ranking, the trend and the classification data are read together.
The top of the field is thin, not dominant
The five leading assignees together hold 27 of the 92 records in scope — 29.3% of the field. That is real concentration but far from a monopoly: a single leader sits at 8 records, and the count drops off quickly after that, meaning most of the remaining 65 records are spread across a long tail of single- or double-filing entrants.
Steady, not surging, momentum
Filings moved from 7 in 2021 to 8 in 2024, a 14% rise over that three-year window. That is measured growth rather than a filing rush, and it comes after a 2018 peak of 12 — the field has not returned to that level, though later years remain undercounted due to publication lag.
Detection methodology crowds out adjacent claims
Material analysis and testing (G01N) covers the overwhelming majority of records. Business-process filings (G06Q, 7.6%) and digital-processing claims (G06F, 4.3%) are present but minor, suggesting that data-platform and workflow-automation angles around contaminant testing are less contested than the underlying assay methods themselves.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to contaminant control in botanical raw materials, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and how they cluster
Institutional testing bodies and agricultural universities dominate the assignee list, with collaboration concentrated around a small number of recurring pairings rather than spread evenly across the field.
A single institute leads by a clear margin
The top-ranked assignee holds 8 records, roughly four times the count at fifth place (2). That gap suggests one organisation has built sustained filing discipline around contaminant detection methods, while most others in the ranking have filed only once or twice.
One partnership anchors the co-filing network
The strongest co-assignee link in the dataset pairs a Beijing-based testing technology company with a national quality inspection research institute, sharing 8 filings. The next strongest pairings drop to 2 shared filings each, indicating this is an outlier collaboration rather than a broader pattern of joint filing.
Leading assignees show no recent-year activity
None of the six most active named assignees recorded a filing in the latest year of the dataset. Given the roughly 18-month publication lag, this likely reflects filings still working through the pipeline rather than leaders exiting the space, but it means visible momentum has shifted toward smaller or newer filers.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Beijing Hezhong Hengxing Testing Technology Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Chinese Academy of Inspection and Quarantine (National Food Safety HACCP Application Research Center) | 0 | — |
| Nanjing Agricultural University | 0 | — |
| Yunnan Radio Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Taiwan Agricultural Chemicals and Toxic Substances Research Institute, Council of Agriculture, Executive Yuan | 0 | — |
| 湖南农业大学 | 0 | — |
| 浙江大学 | 0 | — |
| 武汉大学 | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, portfolio positioning or licensing.
Map claims against the leading pairing
With one co-assignee pairing holding 8 shared filings, a focused claim-chart review of that pairing's portfolio will clarify how tightly the core detection methods are actually held versus merely filed.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaTest the under-claimed branches
Sulphur fumigation detection and species authentication show comparatively thin coverage relative to core G01N filings. A prior-art search scoped narrowly to those branches will confirm whether the white space holds before committing claim language.
Run a targeted prior-art search in EurekaRecheck momentum once 2025-2026 data settles
Because publication lag suppresses the two most recent years, any read on whether leading assignees have actually gone quiet should be revisited once those years are more fully populated.
Track filing trends in EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
Across the 88 ranked assignees covering 92 records, the leading filer holds 8 records, noticeably ahead of the field — fifth place holds only 2. The top 5 assignees combined account for 27 records, or 29.3% of all 92 in scope, which is real concentration but leaves the majority of records spread across a long tail of one- or two-filing entrants, mostly agricultural universities and regional testing institutes.
Filings rose 14% between 2021 and 2024, from 7 to 8 records, which counts as steady rather than explosive growth. The field's high point so far was 2018, at 12 filings, a level not yet matched again. Figures for 2025 and 2026 look lower still, but that reflects an 18-month publication lag rather than an actual drop in filing activity, so those two years should not be read as a slowdown.
US11256723B2, assigned to Chinese Academy of Inspection and Quarantine, claims a pesticide residue detection data platform that combines high-resolution mass spectrometry with an internet-connected data system and automated report generation. It covers the architecture of allied laboratory databases, a data collection system, and an intelligent analysis system that runs statistical models and returns conclusions to client laboratories. Anyone building a networked detection-reporting platform with automated statistical analysis in this domain should review its claim scope closely, since it sits squarely in the data-platform corner of the field rather than in the underlying assay chemistry.
The IPC breakdown shows G01N (material analysis and testing) covering 85.9% of the 92 records, while adjacent classes such as cleaning processes (B08B, 4.3%), crushing and grinding pretreatment (B02C, 2.2%) and food composition (A23L, 2.2%) remain comparatively thin. Sulphur fumigation detection and species authentication for herbal matrices also show limited dedicated coverage relative to the core detection-method cluster. These lower-density branches are worth a targeted prior-art check before assuming the space is closed.
China accounts for the largest share of receiving-office activity in this dataset at 61 records, followed by the United States at 12 and India at 8. Europe (EPO) shows 5 records, with the Philippines and Austria each contributing a smaller number. This distribution reflects where botanical raw material testing and agricultural quality inspection are most institutionally concentrated rather than where the underlying science originates.
Research Contaminant Control in Botanical Raw Materials in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole contaminant control in botanical raw materials 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.