Zevachim 98A

איכא דנפקא ליה מהכא, ואיכא דנפקא ליה מהכא.

There is one tanna who derives it, the halakha that only males of priestly families may eat of the communal peace offering, from here, i.e., the precedent mentioned explicitly with regard to the meal offering; and there is one tanna who derives it from there, i.e., the amplification of the verse stated with regard to meal offerings, sin offerings, and guilt offerings.

״חטאת״⁠ – מה חטאת מתקדשת בבלוע, אף כל מתקדשת בבלוע.

The Talmud continues expounding the verse: “This is the law of the burnt offering, of the meal offering, and of the sin offering, and of the guilt offering, and of the inauguration offering, and of the sacrifice of peace offerings.” “Sin offering” teaches: Just as with regard to a sin offering, whatever it touches is sanctified through the substance that becomes absorbed, so too for all offerings mentioned in this verse, whatever they touch is sanctified through the absorbed portions.

״אשם״⁠ – מה אשם אין שפיר ושליא קדוש בו, אף כל אין שפיר ושליא קדוש בו. קסבר: וולדות קדשים בהוייתן הן קדושים, ודנין אפשר משאי אפשר.

“Guilt offering” teaches: Just as with regard to a guilt offering, a fetal sac and a placenta are not sacred within it, because a guilt offering is always male and as such never holds a fetal sac or a placenta, so too for any of the offerings mentioned in the verse, a fetal sac and a placenta are not sacred if found within it. The Talmud notes: Evidently, this tanna holds that with regard to the offspring of sacrificial animals, they are sanctified only as they are from the moments of their births, but not in utero. And he also holds that one derives the possible from the impossible, so that the halakha of a fetal sac and of a placenta concerning female animals may be derived from the halakha of a male animal.