Lemma 36.13.1. Let $X$ be a scheme and let $j : U \to X$ be a quasi-compact open immersion. The functors

are essentially surjective. If $X$ is quasi-compact, then the functors

are essentially surjective.

Lemma 36.13.1. Let $X$ be a scheme and let $j : U \to X$ be a quasi-compact open immersion. The functors

\[ D_\mathit{QCoh}(\mathcal{O}_ X) \to D_\mathit{QCoh}(\mathcal{O}_ U) \quad \text{and}\quad D^+_\mathit{QCoh}(\mathcal{O}_ X) \to D^+_\mathit{QCoh}(\mathcal{O}_ U) \]

are essentially surjective. If $X$ is quasi-compact, then the functors

\[ D^-_\mathit{QCoh}(\mathcal{O}_ X) \to D^-_\mathit{QCoh}(\mathcal{O}_ U) \quad \text{and}\quad D^ b_\mathit{QCoh}(\mathcal{O}_ X) \to D^ b_\mathit{QCoh}(\mathcal{O}_ U) \]

are essentially surjective.

**Proof.**
The argument preceding the lemma applies for the first case because $Rj_*$ maps $D_\mathit{QCoh}(\mathcal{O}_ U)$ into $D_\mathit{QCoh}(\mathcal{O}_ X)$ by Lemma 36.4.1. It is clear that $Rj_*$ maps $D^+_\mathit{QCoh}(\mathcal{O}_ U)$ into $D^+_\mathit{QCoh}(\mathcal{O}_ X)$ which implies the statement on bounded below complexes. Finally, Lemma 36.4.1 guarantees that $Rj_*$ maps $D^-_\mathit{QCoh}(\mathcal{O}_ U)$ into $D^-_\mathit{QCoh}(\mathcal{O}_ X)$ if $X$ is quasi-compact. Combining these two we obtain the last statement.
$\square$

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked.

In your comment you can use Markdown and LaTeX style mathematics (enclose it like `$\pi$`

). A preview option is available if you wish to see how it works out (just click on the eye in the toolbar).

Unfortunately JavaScript is disabled in your browser, so the comment preview function will not work.

All contributions are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.

## Comments (0)