We again give thanks to A. Sorokin and A. Klyuchevskii and the Editorial Board of the Journal for the opportunity to discuss our results that have been published in the “Journal of Seismology” (Dobrynina, A.A., Sankov, V.A., Tcydypova, L.R., German, V.I., Chechelnitsky V.V., Ulzibat M. Hovsgol Earthquake 5 December 2014, Mw = 4.9: seismic and acoustic effects // J Seismology. 2018. V. 22, Is. 2. P. 377–389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10950-017-9711-z). In our article, on the basis of the arrival time of the infrasound signal at the Tory site, the seismic waveform analysis and evaluations of the horizontal and vertical surface displacement, we suggested that the registered acoustic signal of the Hovsgol earthquake on 5 December 2014, Mw = 4.9 was generated by the interaction of seismic waves with the regional topography. In contrast, A. Sorokin and A. Klyuchevskii believe that the infrasound signal was associated with flexural waves from ice on the surface of the lake above the source of the earthquake. However, there are many crucial points in their comments that we find to be scientifically flawed and poorly reasoned. In this reply, we give a detailed response to their comments.

我们再次感谢A. Sorokin和A. Klyuchevskii和《期刊》编辑委员会有机会讨论我们发表在《地震学杂志》上的结果”（Dobrynina，AA，Sankov，VA，Tcydypova，LR，德语，VI，Chechelnitsky VV，Ulzibat M. Hovsgol地震，2014年12月5日，Mw = 4.9：地震和声学效应，// J Seismology。2018. V. 22，Is 2. P. 377–389。https://doi.org/10.1007/s10950-017-9711-z）。在我们的文章中，根据次声信号在Tory站点的到达时间，地震波形分析以及水平和垂直表面位移的评估，我们建议在2014年12月5日记录的Hovsgol地震的声信号， Mw = 4.9由地震波与区域地形的相互作用产生。相反，A。Sorokin和A. Klyuchevskii认为次声信号与地震源上方湖表面冰上的弯曲波有关。然而，他们的评论中有许多关键点，我们发现它们在科学上是有缺陷的，而且缺乏合理的理由。在此回复中，我们对他们的评论进行了详细的回复。