This overseas reblog of a pop science blog which co-blogged a piece from @beckyoskin working for a blogring does not pass the smell test. At the very least, the headline is garbage.
There is no link to the source (here: http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/3/1/63/pdf), no supporting material presented, it makes some odd claims starting with "ants prefer to live on active faults" (this paper says nothing about that - it's talking about ants that happen to be found in a geologically interesting faulting area) and ends up with "ants can predict earthquakes". Which then goes up to the headline.
Stop stop stop stop stop.
This paper is a decent exploration of performing day+night video analysis to describe above-ground ant behavior over large periods. The rest of it seems reaching and improbable, but I don't have the background to comment on any of the math or geology presented.
Ok, nevermind on the siting bit, the paper is drafting on her PHD thesis which presumably supports the argument that these ants mounds correlate with faults.
There is no link to the source (here: http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/3/1/63/pdf), no supporting material presented, it makes some odd claims starting with "ants prefer to live on active faults" (this paper says nothing about that - it's talking about ants that happen to be found in a geologically interesting faulting area) and ends up with "ants can predict earthquakes". Which then goes up to the headline.
Stop stop stop stop stop.
This paper is a decent exploration of performing day+night video analysis to describe above-ground ant behavior over large periods. The rest of it seems reaching and improbable, but I don't have the background to comment on any of the math or geology presented.