Fastest
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 →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/stored-product-insect-management-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Food ProcessingStored Product Insect Management Patents: Filing Concentration and Open Claim Space
- 74% of all 50 records sit with just five assignees, and 98% sit with ten — this field is tightly held at the top with almost no middle tier.
- Filing grew 33% from 2021 to 2024, the most recent complete years, after peaking at 7 records in 2022.
- A01N biocide claims cover 68% of records, while monitoring, sensing and detection classes stay in single digits — the imbalance is the clearest signal of where claim space is still open.
50
Published Records
74%
Top-5 Share of All Records
+33%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
WO
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (3 records) with 2024 (4) — 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 50 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What the patent record shows about stored product insect management
Stored product insect management covers the methods, chemistries and equipment used to control insects in grain, seed and food storage — from fumigant chemistry and sealing quality to monitoring traps and reentry-interval protocols. The scope here draws on 50 published records filed or published between 2015 and mid-2026, indexed against terms spanning phosphine resistance, exposure time, alternative fumigants and monitoring traps. Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the most recent one to two years of the trend understate actual filing activity.
The picture that emerges is a field with a small set of established filers holding most of the published record, a filing pace that has grown rather than flattened through the most recent complete years, and a technology mix weighted heavily toward biocide and pesticide-activity chemistry relative to monitoring, sensing or analytical approaches.
Filing activity and technology composition, 2015–2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Stored Product Insect Management covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
The Data
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 50-record dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and how those records distribute across IPC subclasses.
Filing trend, 2017–2026
Filings moved from 2 in 2017 to a peak of 7 in 2022, then grew 33% from 2021 (3) to 2024 (4) — the last year with a complete publication window. 2025 and 2026 figures will rise as later-filed applications publish.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
A01N (biocides/agrochemicals) appears in 68.0% of the 50 records, far ahead of A61L sterilising and disinfecting (20.0%) and B01D separation processes (16.0%). Detection and analysis classes — G01N at 8.0% and A01M pest/vermin control at 6.0% — are comparatively thin, and records can carry more than one class so these shares sum past 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 50 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Stored Product Insect Management covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Stored Product Insect Management with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about stored product insect management and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
Most-cited records in the dataset
Representative Filing
US20070225338A1 — Juvenile Hormone Analogs for Control of Leafhopper and Treehopper Pests
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA RESEARCH FOUNDATION, INC.
The present invention pertains to compounds and methods for controlling treehopper and leafhopper pests, such as the glassy-winged sharpshooter (GWSS), while conserving their parasites (such as parasitoid wasps). In one embodiment, the compound is a juvenile hormone analog such as methoprene, kinoprene, and hydropene. The invention also concerns pesticidal compositions comprising the compounds of the invention and a pesticidally acceptable carrier. The invention further concerns methods for controlling pests, such as GWSS, while conserving their parasites, by applying a compound or composition of the invention to the pest or pest-inhabited locus.Filed by University of Florida Research Foundation, Inc. — published 2007-09-27, cited 9 times within this dataset.
View full recordHighest-citation records
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2000021364A2 | A natural and safe alternative to fungicides, bacteriocides, nematicides and insecticides for plant protectio… | 98 |
| 2 | US5955082A | Insecticidal factor from field peas | 20 |
| 3 | US20070225338A1 | Juvenile Hormone Analogs for Control of Leafhopper and Treehopper Pests | 9 |
| 4 | AU2004201268A1 | A natural and safe alternative to fungicides, bacteriocides, nematicides and insecticides for plant protectio… | 5 |
| 5 | US20110139086A1 | Method, Apparatus, and System for Euthanizing Large Numbers of Animals with Solid Carbon Dioxide | 4 |
| 6 | WO2021062488A1 | Apparatus and process for irradiating materials with infrared radiation | 3 |
| 7 | WO2022101932A1 | A novel biofumigant composition and a process for the preparation thereof | 2 |
| 8 | EP2873322A1 | Improved fumigant | 2 |
| 9 | WO2001026475A1 | Bulk disinfestation of commodities | 2 |
| 10 | EP1119257A2 | A natural and safe alternative to fungicides, bacteriocides, nematicides and insecticides for plant protectio… | 2 |
Citation counts reflect influence within this searched corpus and skew toward older filings; treat them as a signal of prior visibility, not current commercial relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Stored Product Insect Management covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Where to run it
For builders
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 →Insights
What the numbers mean for filing strategy
Three patterns stand out once the ranking, trend and technology mix are read together.
Concentration
74.0% / 98.0%
top 5 / top 10 share of 50 records
The field is held by a narrow group
Five assignees account for 74.0% of all 50 records in scope, and the top ten account for 98.0%. With a leader at 15 records and fifth place at only 4, the drop-off is steep — there is essentially no middle tier of moderate filers, only a leader, a small cluster behind it, and a long tail of single-record entrants.
Based on the 21-company ranked assignee list returned for this dataset.
Momentum
+33%
2021 → 2024 filing growth
Activity is building, not fading
Filing rose from 3 records in 2021 to 4 in 2024, a 33% increase over that span, after touching a peak of 7 in 2022. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the apparent dip in 2025–2026 reflects incomplete data rather than a real slowdown.
2024 is the most recent year treated as complete.
Technology skew
68.0% vs 8.0%
A01N biocide share vs G01N analysis share
Chemistry dominates, detection lags
A01N biocide and agrochemical claims cover 68.0% of the 50 records, while material analysis and testing (G01N) sits at just 8.0% and pest/vermin control (A01M) at 6.0%. That gap suggests monitoring, sensing and detection-linked filings have had far less claim pressure applied to them than chemical control methods.
Shares are of all 50 records; a record can carry multiple IPC classes.
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to stored product insect management, with the prior art for and against each one.
Co-filing patterns
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| YEGEN OKTAY | TUZUN SADIK | 5 |
| Auburn University | YEGEN OKTAY | 4 |
| Auburn University | TUZUN SADIK | 4 |
| PARRHEIM FOODS | Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada | 2 |
| PARRHEIM FOODS | HER MAJESTY IN RIGHT OF CANADA AS REPRESENTED BY AGRI & AGRI FO OD CANADA | 2 |
| YEGEN OKTAY | AUBURN UNIV INDAL PROGRAMS & TECH TRANSFER | 1 |
| TUZUN SADIK | AUBURN UNIV INDAL PROGRAMS & TECH TRANSFER | 1 |
Seven co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, with the strongest pairing recurring across five shared records — a sign of long-running institutional collaboration rather than one-off joint filings.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Stored Product Insect Management covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players
Who is filing, and where the gate sits
The ranked assignee list spans 21 companies and institutions, from university research foundations to agricultural agencies and a monitoring-technology firm. Recent-year momentum across several named institutions has flattened to zero, consistent with the broader publication lag rather than an exit from the field.
Leader
15 records
records held by the top-ranked assignee
One filer sets the ceiling
The leading assignee holds 15 of the 50 records in scope, well clear of fifth place at 4 and tenth place at 2. Any new entrant should expect to design around this position first when working in core fumigant or exposure-time claims.
Ranking covers 21 companies total.
Long tail
21 ranked assignees
total companies in the ranking
A wide base of small filers
Below the leading cluster, most of the 21 ranked assignees hold only one or two records each. This pattern is typical of a field still anchored by a handful of specialist labs and agencies rather than broad industrial adoption.
Tenth place holds 2 records.
Collaboration
5 shared records
strongest co-assignee pairing
Institutional pairs recur
The strongest co-assignee pairing in the dataset appears across five shared records, with two related pairings each appearing four times. This points to sustained academic collaboration rather than isolated joint ventures.
Seven co-assignee pairs identified overall.
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Auburn University | 0 | — |
| CONNECTICUT AGRI EXPERIMENT STATION THE | 0 | — |
| YEGEN OKTAY | 0 | — |
| TUZUN SADIK | 0 | — |
| PARRHEIM FOODS | 0 | — |
| INST OF BIORESOURCES & SUSTAINABLE DEV | 0 | — |
| CENTAUR ANALYTICS INC | 0 | — |
| Council of Scientific and Industrial Research | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Stored Product Insect Management covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's Next
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, portfolio positioning, or identifying open claim space.
Map claims against the leader's 15 records
Before drafting in fumigant chemistry or exposure-time methods, run a claim-by-claim comparison against the top-ranked assignee's filings to see which mechanisms are already occupied.
Explore assignee claims in EurekaTrack the 2025–2026 publication window
Because publication lags filing by about 18 months, records filed in the last two years are still arriving. Revisit the trend once 2025 closes out to see if the 2021–2024 growth rate held.
Set up trend monitoring in EurekaProbe the monitoring and detection gap
With G01N and A01M classes each under 10% of records, sensor-based monitoring and diagnostic testing for resistance remain comparatively open relative to chemical control claims.
Search white space in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Stored Product Insect Management covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions on stored product insect management patents
Within this 50-record dataset, one assignee leads with 15 records, well ahead of the fifth-ranked filer at 4. The top five assignees together account for 74.0% of all 50 records, and the top ten account for 98.0%, so the field is concentrated in a small group of universities and agricultural research institutions rather than spread across many industrial players. Anyone evaluating freedom-to-operate should start by reviewing the leader's claim scope before looking further down the ranking.
The search terms behind this dataset specifically include phosphine resistance and alternative fumigants, and biocide-related IPC class A01N covers 68.0% of the 50 records, indicating dense claim activity around fumigant chemistry generally. However, diagnostic testing for resistance and monitoring-trap integration sit in much thinner classes such as G01N (8.0%) and A01M (6.0%), suggesting the chemistry side is more crowded than the detection side. A new filing focused on resistance diagnostics rather than fumigant composition may face less prior art.
Filing activity rose from 2 records in 2017 to a peak of 7 in 2022, and grew 33% from 3 records in 2021 to 4 in 2024, the most recent year with a complete publication window. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the lower counts shown for 2025 and 2026 reflect incomplete data rather than an actual decline. Readers should treat any apparent recent drop-off with that lag in mind rather than reading it as reduced R&D interest.
Relative to the 68.0% share held by biocide and agrochemical claims (A01N), monitoring and sensing technologies remain lightly claimed: material analysis and testing (G01N) covers only 8.0% of the 50 records, and pest/vermin control equipment (A01M) covers 6.0%. Sub-areas such as sensor-integrated monitoring traps, sealing quality verification and reentry-interval measurement protocols show comparatively little dedicated claim coverage. These branches are worth a closer prior-art search before assuming they are occupied, since the dataset suggests they are not covered as densely as chemical control methods.
Among the offices captured in this dataset, WIPO's PCT route leads with 9 filings, followed by India with 7, and Europe (EPO) and the United States each with 6. Australia and New Zealand each show 5 filings, indicating meaningful filing activity outside the traditional US-Europe axis, likely reflecting the agricultural storage relevance of Indian and Australasian markets. Applicants targeting multiple jurisdictions should note this spread when planning a filing strategy rather than assuming US/EPO coverage is sufficient.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Stored Product Insect Management covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Stored Product Insect Management in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole stored product insect management 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.