Comparing network analysis methodologies for consumer–resource relations at species and ecosystems scales

This research compares two existing methodologies, mixed trophic impact analysis and utility analysis, which use network analysis to evaluate the direct, pair-wise, and indirect, holistic, ecological relations between ecosystem compartments. The two approaches have many similarities, but differ in some key assumptions which affect both the final results and interpretations. Here, we briefly introduce both methodologies through a series of two simple examples; a 3-compartment competition model and a 3-compartment food chain model, and then apply the methodologies to a 15-compartment ecosystem model of the Chesapeake Bay. This example demonstrates how implementing the various conceptual and methodological assumptions lead to differing results. Notably, the overall number of positive relations is greatly affected by the treatment of the self-interactions and the handling of detritus compartments lead to a distinction between ecological or trophic relations. We recommend slight changes to both methodologies, not necessarily in order to bring them completely together, but because each has some points which are stronger and better defensible.