The role of species’ interactions in structuring biological communities remains unclear. Mutualistic symbioses, involving close positive interactions between two distinct organismal lineages, provide an excellent means to explore the roles of both evolutionary and ecological processes in determining how positive interactions affect community structure. In this study, we investigate patterns of co-diversification between fungi and algae for a range of New Zealand lichens at the community, genus, and species levels and explore explanations for possible patterns related to spatial scale and pattern, taxonomic diversity of the lichens considered, and the level sampling replication. We assembled six independent datasets to compare patterns in phylogenetic congruence with varied spatial extent of sampling, taxonomic diversity and level of specimen replication. For each dataset, we used the DNA sequences from the ITS regions of both the fungal and algal genomes from lichen specimens to produce genetic distance matrices. Phylogenetic congruence between fungi and algae was quantified using distance-based redundancy analysis and we used geographic distance matrices in Moran’s eigenvector mapping and variance partitioning to evaluate the effects of spatial variation on the quantification of phylogenetic congruence. Phylogenetic congruence was highly significant for all datasets and a large proportion of variance in both algal and fungal genetic distances was explained by partner genetic variation. Spatial variables, primarily at large and intermediate scales, were also important for explaining genetic diversity patterns in all datasets. Interestingly, spatial structuring was stronger for fungal than algal genetic variation. As the spatial extent of the samples increased, so too did the proportion of explained variation that was shared between the spatial variables and the partners’ genetic variation. Different lichen taxa showed some variation in their phylogenetic congruence and spatial genetic patterns and where greater sample replication was used, the amount of variation explained by partner genetic variation increased. Our results suggest that the phylogenetic congruence pattern, at least at small spatial scales, is likely due to reciprocal co-adaptation or co-dispersal. However, the detection of these patterns varies among different lichen taxa, across spatial scales and with different levels of sample replication. This work provides insight into the complexities faced in determining how evolutionary and ecological processes may interact to generate diversity in symbiotic association patterns at the population and community levels. Further, it highlights the critical importance of considering sample replication, taxonomic diversity and spatial scale in designing studies of co-diversification.

The use of DNA data is ubiquitous across animal sciences. DNA may be obtained from an organism for a myriad of reasons including identification and distinction between cryptic species, sex identification, comparisons of different morphocryptic genotypes or assessments of relatedness between organisms prior to a behavioural study. DNA should be obtained while minimizing the impact on the fitness, behaviour or welfare of the subject being tested, as this can bias experimental results and cause long-lasting effects on wild animals. Furthermore, minimizing impact on experimental animals is a key Refinement principle within the '3Rs' framework which aims to ensure that animal welfare during experimentation is optimised. The term 'non-invasive DNA sampling' has been defined to indicate collection methods that do not require capture or cause disturbance to the animal, including any effects on behaviour or fitness. In practice this is not always the case, as the term 'non-invasive' is commonly used in the literature to describe studies where animals are restrained or subjected to aversive procedures. We reviewed the non-invasive DNA sampling literature for the past six years (380 papers published in 2013-2018) and uncovered the existence of a significant gap between the current use of this terminology (i.e. 'non-invasive DNA sampling') and its original definition. We show that 58% of the reviewed papers did not comply with the original definition. We discuss the main experimental and ethical issues surrounding the potential confusion or misuse of the phrase 'non-invasive DNA sampling' in the current literature and provide potential solutions. In addition, we introduce the terms 'non-disruptive' and 'minimally disruptive' DNA sampling, to indicate methods that eliminate or minimise impacts not on the physical integrity/structure of the animal, but on its behaviour, fitness and welfare, which in the literature reviewed corresponds to the situation for which an accurate term is clearly missing. Furthermore, we outline when these methods are appropriate to use.

PrePrints 2Note to the readers: this manuscript is currently under development. New versions will 22 be regularly uploaded on PeerJ pre-print. We welcome constructive comments. 24Blood, sweat and tears: non-invasive vs. non-disruptive 25

PrePrintsit may be necessary to obtain DNA from an organism before using it in a bioassay or 35 an experiment, to identify and distinguish between cryptic species, or when 36 comparing different morphocryptic genotypes. Another example could be the 37 assessment of relatedness between organisms prior to a behavioural study. In such 38 cases, DNA must be obtained without affecting the fitness or behaviour of the subject 39 being tested, as this could bias the results of the experiment. This points out the 40 existence of a gap in the current molecular and experimental biology terminology, for 41 which we propose the use of the term non-disruptive DNA sampling, specifically 42 addressing behaviour and/or fitness, rather than simply physical integrity 43 (invasiveness). We refer to these methods as "non-disruptive", and discuss when they 44 are appropriate to use.

Historical datasets can establish a critical baseline of plant–animal interactions for understanding contemporary interactions in the context of global change. Pollen is often incidentally preserved on animals in natural history collections. Techniques for removing pollen from insects have largely been developed for fresh insect specimens or historical specimens with large amounts of pollen on specialized structures. However, many key pollinating insects do not have these specialized structures and thus, there is a need for a method to extract pollen from these small and fragile insects. Here, we propose a precision glycerine jelly swab tool to allow for the precise removal of pollen from old, small and fragile insect specimens. We use this tool to remove pollen from five families of insects collected in the late 1970s. Additionally, we compare our method with four previously published techniques for removing pollen from pinned contemporary specimens. We show the functionality of the precision glycerine jelly swab for removing small quantities of pollen across insect families. We found that across the five methods, all removed pollen; yet, it was clear that some are better suited for fragile specimens. In particular, the traditional glycerine jelly swab and the precision glycerine jelly swabs both performed well for removing pollen from bee faces. The shaking wash resulted in specimen fracture and residue left behind, the ethanol rinses left setae matted, and the glycerol swabbing left residue on the specimen. Additionally, we present photographs documenting the effects of these methods on pinned honey bee specimens. The precision glycerine jelly swab opens up opportunities to sample pollen from a variety of insects in natural history collections. These pollen samples can be incorporated into downstream analyses for pollen identification either via microscopy or DNA sequencing, and the resulting plant–insect interaction data can establish historical baselines for contemporary comparison. Beyond our application of this method to pollen on insects, this precision glycerine jelly swab tool could be used to explore pollen placement specialization or to sample bryophyte, fungal and tree fern spores dispersing on animals.