The new Field Guide to the Tiger Beetles says this species is rare or has disappeared from Ohio, though once reported as far west as Indiana. They don't include Ohio on the range map.

So if this is C. ancocisconensis it is a very nice find.

But I also find that this one doesn't match my own C. ancocisconensis photos. For one thing, the mandibles of yours have much more white. Also, the configuration of large teeth on the mandibles seems different. The teeth on the edge of the labrum also seem different. Anyhow for comparison purposes here is my photo of a West Virginia individual:



Unfortunately a quick solution to this ID dilemma is unlikely. Using Google image search I tried to find other images of the "face" of C. ancocisconensis and came up empty handed.

My ID of my West Virginia photo was confirmed by an entomologist, the co-author of Tiger Beetles of West Virginia but of course that doesn't mean that yours isn't C. ancocisconensis. I do see some differences, though, between the beetles in our two photos.

I really don't see a problem with both beetles being C. ancocisconensis. The Ohio population from that site has been known since the late 1980s, and was also confirmed by entomologists.

The West Virginian beetle is very worn, with hardly any setae on the head. I noticed the Ohio beetle is a male, while the West Virginian appears to possibly be female. I'm not sure if this has anything to do with the amount of white on the mandible (rather doubt it). I wonder if the way they're holding the mandibles (yours is more open), plus the fresher visage of the Ohio beetle are contributing factors. Very interesting. Good eye.