Population decline is a process, yet estimates of current extinction rates often consider just the final step of that process by counting numbers of species lost in historical times. This neglects the increased extinction risk that affects a large proportion of species, and consequently underestimates the effective extinction rate. Here, we model observed trajectories through IUCN Red List extinction risk categories for all bird species globally over 28 years, and estimate an overall effective extinction rate of 2.17 × 10 −4 /species/year. This is six times higher than the rate of outright extinction since 1500, as a consequence of the large number of species whose status is deteriorating. We very conservatively estimate that global conservation efforts have reduced the effective extinction rate by 40%, but mostly through preventing critically endangered species from going extinct rather than by preventing species at low risk from moving into higher-risk categories. Our findings suggest that extinction risk in birds is accumulating much more than previously appreciated, but would be even greater without conservation efforts.

According to Cope’s rule, lineages tend to evolve towards larger body size, possibly because of selective advantages of being large. The status of Cope’s ‘rule’ remains controversial as it is supported in some but not all large‐scale fossil studies. Here, we test for Cope’s rule by Bayesian analyses of average body masses of 3253 extant mammal species on a dated phylogenetic tree. The data favour a model that does not assume Cope’s rule. When Cope’s rule is assumed, the best estimate of its strength is an average ancestor‐descendant increase in body size of only 0.4%, which sharply contrasts with the 9% bias estimated from fossil mammals. Thus, we find no evidence for Cope’s rule from extant mammals, in agreement with earlier analyses of existing species, which also did not find support for Cope’s rule.

Sexual size dimorphism (SSD) is one of the most common ways in which males and females differ. Male-biased SSD (when males are larger) is often attributed to sexual selection favouring large males. When females are larger (female-biased SSD), it is often argued that natural selection favouring increased fecundity (i.e. larger clutches or eggs) has coevolved with larger female body size. Using comparative phylogenetic and multispecies regression model selection approaches, we test the hypothesis that among-species variation in female fecundity is associated with the evolution of femalebiased SSD. We also ask whether the hypothesized relationship between SSD and fecundity is relaxed upon the evolution of parental care. Our results suggest a strong relationship between the evolution of fecundity and body size, but we find no significant relationship between fecundity and SSD. Similarly, there does not appear to be a relationship between fecundity and the presence or absence of parental care among species. Thus, although female body size and fecundity coevolve, selection for increased fecundity as an explanation for female-biased SSD is inconsistent with our analyses. We caution that a relationship between female body size and fecundity is insufficient evidence for fecundity selection driving the evolution of female-biased SSD.