Critique of Given Scientific Paper

I tried to upload the article but the essaypro website is giving me a server error message so here is the PMCID as well as a direct link to the paper followed by the instructions:
PMC201833, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC201833/pdf/aem00026-0436.pdf

Single page, double spaced. Clear and concise writing. Do not exceed the one page limit. Leave space for name, the name of the article, and the name of the first author.

The first paragraph (no more than 1/3 of your review) should be a brief summary of the work in your own words and not plagiarized from the paper’s abstract. Only include extensive descriptions of the methods used if they are unique, difficult for you to understand, or the main focus of the work. For routine microbiological methods, it is enough to just mention them with any relevant specifics to orient the reader: For example, “PCR assays were used to identify drug-resistant isolates by strain-specific amplification of a segment of the gyrA gene…” or, “Plaque assays were performed in duplicate, and the reported values are n = 2 averages.”

Use additional paragraph(s) to address any one or more of the following points, according to how the work impacted you.

1. Refer to Table 1. Do you feel that their criteria for establishing an effect of the day, described in footnote “b”, are adequate to indicate an effect on plaque assay performance? Why or why not? Consider and discuss alternative ways of presenting and analyzing the data.

2. If we accept the results for T2 as most relevant to what we may encounter for T4, are there any concerns with the T2 data of Table 1? Are you confident that “no suppression” is the right final conclusion?

3. Based on the data of Tables 1 and 2, would you recommend either tetrazolium red or tetrazolium violet dye for plaque assay of our test virus, Bacteriophage T4? Explain your recommendation and justify it with your own statistics derived from the paper’s data. If you cannot reach a conclusion, explain what additional information and analyses you would need to formulate a conclusion.

4. Present any alternative idea you have had regarding improvements to the plaque assay which was stimulated by your reading of this paper. Discuss a way to test your idea.