We can use the The Salamander Lemma (and the various mural maps) to quickly prove many of the named "diagram lemmas" one encounters in homological algebra (and elsewhere). This is just a sampling.
The Four Lemma
Consider a commutative diagram in of the form below, where the rows are exact, is an epimorphism, and is a monomorphism:
Then:
In particular, if is a monomorphism then so is ; and if is an epimorphism then so is .
By the given assumptions, we can extend the given diagram to a double complex below, in which all columns are exact and the middle two rows are exact:
For the first statement it is enough to show that , since this is equivalent to . First use the intramural isomorphisms to conclude
Then the long zig-zag of extramural isomorphisms shows that this is isomorphic to in the bottom-left corner of the diagram.
The second statement is proven analogously.
The Five Lemma
Consider a commutative diagram in of the form below, with exact rows:
Then:
If and are epimorphisms and is a monomorphism, then is an epimorphism.
If and are monomorphisms and is an epimorphism, then is a monomorphism.
Note that as an immediate corollary, if and are isomorphisms and is an epimorphism and is a monomorphism, then is an isomorphism. This statement is sometimes called the "weak five lemma." By contrast, the above statement is called the "sharp five lemma."
To see how this result follows from the Four Lemma, let's look at the proof of the first statement. Consider the following part of the diagram:
The Four Lemma applies, since the rows are exact, is a monomorphism, and is an epimorphism. Since is an epimorphism, the Four Lemma implies that so is . This proves the first statement.
The analogous argument proves the second statement.
If both rows are exact in a commutative diagram of the form
then there is a morphism such that the following sequence is exact:
The morphism is called the connecting morphism.
To prove this lemma, complete the given diagram to a double complex:
By assumption, all of the columns are exact, the rows are exact at the and , and the squares involving and commute.
We first prove exactness at , which means proving . We first note that vertical exactness at implies we have an intramural isomorphism . We can then use the zig-zag of extramural isomorphisms
We thus have , as desired. Exactness at is analogous.
As for the connecting morphism , this is the same as giving an isomorphism from to . This is, in turn, given by the intramural isomorphisms and and the zig-zag of extramural isomorphisms below: