In the paper by Albrecht et al. (2020), the authors would like to add Duncan B. Westbury to the list of authors as co‐author and also acknowledge his funders.

We previously demonstrated that small mammals impact plant recruitment globally via size‐dependent seed predation, generating a unimodal pattern across ecosystems. Chen et al. (2021) critiqued our seed removal analysis, advocating corrections for exposure time. We show such manipulations are unwarranted and argue for increased emphasis on plant recruitment metrics.

Banks‐Leite et al. (2021) claim that our suggestion of preserving ≥ 40% forest cover lacks evidence and can be problematic. We find these claims unfounded, and discuss why conservation planning urgently requires valuable, well‐supported and feasible general guidelines like the 40% criterion. Using region‐specific thresholds worldwide is unfeasible and potentially harmful.

In ‘Uncovering ecological state dynamics with hidden Markov models’ by McClintock et al. (2020), which was published in volume 23, issue 12 in December 2020, the state‐dependent observation distribution matrix for the multi‐state capture–recapture HMM (top left of page 1888) was missing components to account for the fact that Pr(xt = B | St = NB) = 0 and Pr(xt = NB | St = B) = 0. The correct equation

Paz‐Vinas, Jensen et al. (2021) comment on data and methodological limits of Millette, Fugère, Debyser et al. (2020)—some affect a small proportion of our data sets and analyses and others need to be tackled more generally. These points do not refute our main conclusion of no strong signal of human impacts on COI variation globally.