Reviewer #2 (Public Review):
In their study the authors aimed to investigate the dissemination of Enterobacterales plasmids between geographically and temporally restricted isolates recovered from different niches, such as human blood stream infections, livestock, and wastewater treatment works. By using a very strict similarity threshold (Mash distance < 0.0001) the authors identified so-called groups of near-identical plasmids in which plasmids from different genera, species, and clonal background co-clustered. Also, 8% of these groups contained plasmids from different niches (e.g., human BSI and livestock) while in 35% of these cross-niche groups plasmids carried antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes suggesting recent transfer of AMR plasmids between these ecological niches.
Next, the authors set-out to examine the wider plasmid population structure by clustering plasmids based on 21-mer distributions capturing both coding and non-coding plasmid regions and using a data-driven threshold to build plasmid networks and the Louvain algorithm to detect the plasmid clusters. This yielded 247 clusters of which almost half of the clusters contained BSI plasmids and plasmids from at least one other niche, while 21% contained plasmids carrying AMR genes. To further assess cross-niche plasmids similarities, the authors performed an additional plasmid pangenome-like analysis. This highlighted patterns of gain and loss of accessory plasmid functions in the background of a conserved plasmid backbone.
By comparing plasmid core gene or plasmid backbone phylogenies with chromosome core gene phylogenies, the authors assessed in more detail the dissemination of plasmids between humans and livestock. This indicated that, at least for E. coli, AMR dissemination between human and livestock-associated niches is most likely not the result of clonal spread but that plasmid movement plays an important role in cross-niche dissemination of AMR.
Based on these data the authors conclude that in Enterobacterales plasmid spread between different ecological niches could be relatively common, even might be occurring at greater rates than estimated, as signatures of near-identity could be transient once plasmids occupy and adept to a different niche. After such a host jump, subsequent acquisition, and loss of parts of the accessory plasmid gene content, as a result of plasmid evolution after inter-host transfer, may obscure this near-identity signature. As stated by the authors, this will raise challenges for future One Health-based genomic studies.
Strengths<br /> The article is well written with a clear structure. The authors have used for their analysis a comprehensive collection of more than 1500 whole genome sequenced and fully assembled isolates, yielding a dataset of more than 3600 fully assembled plasmids across different bacterial genera, species, clonal backgrounds, and ecological niches. A strong asset of the collection, especially when analyzing dissemination of AMR contained on plasmids, is that isolates were geographically and temporally restricted. Bioinformatic analyses used to discern plasmid similarity are beyond state-of-the-art. The conclusions about dissemination of plasmids between genera, species, clonal background and across ecological niches are well supported by the data. Although conclusions about inter-host plasmid dissemination patterns may have been drawn before, this is to my knowledge the first time that patterns of dissemination of plasmids have been studied at such a high-level of detail in such a well selected dataset using so many fully assembled genomes.
Weaknesses<br /> One conclusion that is not entirely supported by the data is the general statement in the discussion that "cross-niche plasmid in not driven by clonal lineages". From the tanglegram, displaying the low congruence between the plasmid and chromosome core gene phylogeny in E. coli, this conclusion is probably valid for E. coli, but this not necessarily means that this is also the case for the other Enterobacterales genera and species included in this study. For these other genera, the data supporting this conclusion are not given, probably because total number of isolates for certain genera were low, or because certain niches were clearly underrepresented in certain genera.
Furthermore, the BSI as well as the livestock niches were analyzed as single niches while the BSI niche included both nosocomial and community-derived BSI isolates and the Livestock niche included samples from different livestock-related hosts. Given the fact that a substantial number of plasmids were available from cattle, sheep, pigs, and poultry, it would be interesting to see whether particular livestock hosts were more frequently found in the cross-niche plasmid clusters than other livestock hosts and whether the BSI plasmids in these cross-niche clusters were predominantly of community or nosocomial origin.

