I've been wondering why people are desperate to argue that the third sacrifice would have just been some plants and non-sentient animals - when it flies in the face of the thematic meaning of the story, makes every character involved look like an idiot, and has not been mentioned once by a single character, ever. And the only conclusion I can see is that it's because it makes Venat look bad. If she tried to prevent the ancients from sundering a bunch of cows and chickens, she would be silly and callous - if she tried to prevent them from sacrificing ensouled peoples, she'd be sundering them in order to prevent her own people from committing genocide. I don't know about anyone else, but I know which one I think is more in keeping with the themes of the story being told.

No matter how unsupported by any textual evidence it is, and how frankly, silly and absurd it is, people are going to keep bringing up the possibility of a livestock powered Zodiark because they have an axe to grind against Venat.