Herbicide Safener Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- Five filers control 61.1% of the field. 430 of 704 records in scope sit with the top five assignees, so freedom-to-operate work starts with a short list, not a long tail.
- Filing has cooled from its 2017 peak. 46 filings in 2017 fell to 21 by 2024, a -16% change over 2021-2024 — the most recent complete years available given an 18-month publication lag.
- Claims cluster hard on A01N. 81.0% of the 704 records carry an A01N biocide classification, while adjacent breeding and enzyme-assay classes (A01H, C12Q) sit under 5%.
Filing growth compares 2021 (25 records) with 2024 (21) — 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 704 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
Herbicide safeners protect crops from injury when a herbicide is applied, typically by inducing detoxification pathways such as glutathione transferase activity or by altering herbicide uptake and metabolism. This dataset tracks patent filings at the intersection of safener chemistry, crop selectivity and tank mix antagonism — the practical problem of a safener or adjuvant weakening a herbicide’s activity when the two are combined in the same spray tank. The scope spans 2015 through the 2026-07-31 data cut-off and covers 704 published records.
Filing activity here sits mostly with agrochemical majors and their research-institute collaborators, with compound-class chemistry (heterocyclic and acyclic/carbocyclic structures) forming the bulk of claim language around the biocide core.
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 composition
The following two views use the same 704-record scope: a year-by-year filing count, and an IPC subclass breakdown showing where safener-related claim language actually lands.
Filing trend: a 2017 peak, then a gradual pull-back
Filings peaked at 46 in 2017. By the last complete year in the trend, 2024, annual filings had fallen to 21 — a -16% change from the 25 filed in 2021. Counts from 2025 onward are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the apparent drop-off in the most recent years should not be read as the field slowing further; it is largely a reporting artefact.
Technology composition: concentrated in the biocide core
A01N (biocides/agrochemicals) appears on 81.0% of the 704 records, with C07D heterocyclic compounds (33.9%) and A01P pesticide-activity claims (28.7%) forming the next layer. Because a single record can carry several IPC classes, these shares add to more than 100% — they describe overlapping claim scope, not a partition of the field. Genetic and analytical classes (C12N, C12Q, G01N, A01H) each sit under 6%, marking them as comparatively lightly claimed relative to the chemistry-heavy core.
Shares are the percentage of the 704 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Herbicide Safeners and Tank Mix Antagonism with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about herbicide safeners and tank mix antagonism and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this landscape
Herbicide safener combinations for ACCase herbicide-resistant plants (US20190029251A1)
The filing covers compositions and methods for producing wheat plants, plant tissues and seeds carrying altered acetyl-CoA carboxylase (ACCase) genes and proteins, used together with FOP- or DIM-family ACCase herbicides and a cloquintocet acid safener.Filed by Colorado Wheat Research Foundation, Inc.; published 2019-01-31.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2015084796A1 | Pyrrolidinones as herbicides | 150 |
| 2 | WO2004069814A1 | Amino 1, 3, 5-triazines n-substituted with chiral bicyclic radicals, process for their preparation, compositi… | 107 |
| 3 | US20120015811A1 | Solid herbicide compositions with built-in adjuvant | 64 |
| 4 | WO2013148339A1 | Synthetic compounds for vegetative ABA responses | 56 |
| 5 | WO2014210555A1 | Compounds that induce ABA responses | 44 |
| 6 | US20040157739A1 | Amino-1,3,5-triazines N-substituted with chiral bicyclic radicals, process for their preparation, composition… | 41 |
| 7 | US20120129694A1 | Herbicidal capsule suspensions of acetochlor containing reduced amounts of safener | 38 |
| 8 | WO2012009489A2 | Solid herbicide compositions with built-in adjuvant | 35 |
| 9 | US10294202B2 | Pyrrolidinones as herbicides | 31 |
| 10 | WO1999014337A2 | New plant genes | 30 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations — treat them as a signal of influence on later work, not as a ranking 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 data means for filing strategy
Three patterns recur across the assignee ranking, the filing trend and the IPC breakdown, each with a direct bearing on where new filings are likely to face crowded prior art versus open claim space.
Five filers hold most of the field
Top 5 combined account for 430 of the 704 records in scope, and the top 10 extend that to 599 records, or 85.1%. A freedom-to-operate search here is a short-list exercise: clearing the leading handful of assignees clears most of the crowded ground.
Volume has eased from its 2017 high
The field peaked at 46 filings in 2017 and had settled to 21 by 2024, the most recent year that can be treated as complete. Years after 2024 are still filling in given typical publication lag, so this should be read as a levelling-off rather than a collapse.
Claims sit on the biocide core, not the edges
A01N biocide claims and C07D heterocyclic chemistry dominate the record set, while measurement and genetic-engineering classes (C12Q, G01N, C12N) each cover under 6% of records. That gap suggests enzyme-assay and diagnostic angles on safener action are comparatively under-claimed relative to the chemistry itself.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to herbicide safeners and tank mix antagonism, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Dow AgroSciences LLC | Rohm and Haas Company | 18 |
| Dow AgroSciences LLC | Corteva Agriscience LLC | 12 |
| Syngenta Participations AG | The Regents of the University of California | 7 |
| Syngenta Participations AG | Syngenta Crop Protection AG | 6 |
| FMC Corp | E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company | 6 |
| Bayer CropScience LP | Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH | 6 |
| Dow AgroSciences LLC | Rhodia Operations | 5 |
| Dow AgroSciences LLC | LIU LEI | 4 |
Ten co-assignee pairs appear in the data, with the strongest links running between corporate parent-subsidiary pairs and one university collaboration — a reminder that some of the apparent single-company dominance reflects internal group filing rather than independent competitors.
The assignee landscape
The ranking covers 100 companies, counted by patent family, and is the complete set the underlying data endpoint returns for this search — not a curated top-50 or top-100 list. Activity is heavily front-loaded: a handful of agrochemical majors and their subsidiaries account for most of the volume, with research institutes appearing mainly through co-assignee links rather than as standalone leaders.
One filer well ahead of the field
The leading assignee's count is more than triple the fifth-place total of 50, marking a clear gap between the top filer and everyone else in the ranking.
A steep drop after the top ten
By tenth place, annual counts have fallen to 26 records, and the top 10 combined still only reach 85.1% of the 704-record total — meaning the remaining 90 ranked companies share the last 14.9% among them.
Momentum has thinned across the board
Recent-year filing counts among the tracked leaders are low across the board, with the most active assignee logging only a handful of new records in the latest year and several major historical filers showing none.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Syngenta Crop Protection AG | 3 | 0% |
| FMC Corp | 1 | — |
| Dow AgroSciences LLC | 0 | — |
| Corteva Agriscience LLC | 0 | — |
| Syngenta Participations AG | 0 | — |
| AG PLENUS LTD | 0 | — |
| Bayer CropScience LP | 0 | — |
| E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The figures above describe the shape of the field. Turning that into a filing or freedom-to-operate decision means drilling into specific claims and specific assignees.
Map claim overlap against the leading assignees
Start with the top five filers that hold 61.1% of the 704 records and check which specific safener chemistries or crop-selectivity mechanisms their active claims cover before drafting new claim language.
Explore assignee claims in EurekaTrack the under-claimed diagnostic branches
Enzyme-assay and genetic-marker classes sit under 6% of records each, well below the chemistry-heavy core — worth a closer look for white space before committing R&D budget to compound chemistry alone.
Run a white-space search in EurekaCommon questions about herbicide safener patents
A herbicide safener is a compound co-applied or pre-mixed with a herbicide to protect the crop from injury while leaving weed control intact. Safeners typically work by inducing detoxification pathways, most notably glutathione transferase activity, that let the crop metabolise the herbicide faster than the target weeds can. Because the safener's mechanism, the herbicide's chemistry and the crop-selectivity outcome are all separately claimable, safener patents form a distinct sub-field within broader herbicide patenting, which is why a dedicated landscape search like this one turns up 704 records rather than being folded into general herbicide searches.
Filing in this field is concentrated: the top five assignees together account for 430 of the 704 records in scope, or 61.1%, and the top ten extend that to 85.1%. The leading single filer holds 157 records, more than three times the fifth-place count of 50. That concentration reflects a mix of major agrochemical companies and their subsidiaries, so several of the top-ranked names in a raw list are related corporate entities rather than fully independent competitors.
Filing peaked in 2017 at 46 records and has since eased, falling to 21 by 2024 — a -16% change from the 25 filed in 2021, comparing the two most recent years that can be treated as complete. Data from 2025 onward is still filling in because publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, so the apparent decline in the newest years overstates any real slowdown. Overall the trend reads as a levelling-off from a 2017 high rather than a sharp exit from the field.
Tank mix antagonism occurs when combining a herbicide with another agrochemical, adjuvant or safener in the same spray tank reduces the herbicide's weed-control performance rather than improving crop safety. Patent claims addressing this problem typically specify particular safener-herbicide combinations, application timing, or formulation adjustments designed to avoid the antagonistic interaction while preserving selectivity. In this dataset, such claims sit mostly within the A01N biocide classification alongside broader safener chemistry, rather than forming a separately classified branch.
The clearest gaps sit in the classes furthest from the chemistry-heavy core: genetic-engineering methods (C12N), enzyme and DNA-based measurement (C12Q), material analysis (G01N) and plant breeding (A01H) each cover under 6% of the 704 records, compared with 81.0% for the core A01N biocide class. That gap suggests diagnostic and marker-based approaches to predicting or screening for safener response and tank mix compatibility are comparatively under-claimed relative to the underlying compound chemistry, making them worth closer freedom-to-operate review before filing there.
Research Herbicide Safeners and Tank Mix Antagonism in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole herbicide safeners and tank mix antagonism 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.